# Official Journal C 194/12 M

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 194 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6512 May 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 194

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6512 May 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions |
| | OPINIONS |
| | European Economic and Social Committee |
| | 566th plenary session of the European Economic and Social Committee – Interactio, 19.1.2022–20.1.2022 |
| 2022/C 194/01 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Developing artificial intelligence in European micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) (own-initiative opinion) | 1 |
| 2022/C 194/02 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Next Generation SME Strategy — Enhancing Effective and Swift Delivery (own-initiative opinion) | 7 |
| 2022/C 194/03 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on EURES — for a better integration of labour markets (own-initiative opinion) | 14 |
| 2022/C 194/04 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Towards a new care model for older people: learning from COVID-19 (own-initiative opinion) | 19 |
| 2022/C 194/05 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Rule of law and the recovery fund (own-initiative opinion) | 27 |
| 2022/C 194/06 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on How will the identified industrial ecosystems contribute to the strategic autonomy of the EU and the well-being of Europeans? (exploratory opinion) | 34 |
| 2022/C 194/07 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Innovative financial instruments as part of the development of social impact companies (exploratory opinion) | 39 |
| 2022/C 194/08 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on The benefits of the outermost regions for the EU (exploratory opinion) | 44 |
| 2022/C 194/09 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work (exploratory opinion requested by the French presidency) | 50 |
| 2022/C 194/10 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Food security and sustainable food systems (exploratory opinion requested by the French presidency) | 72 |

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

OPINIONS

European Economic and Social Committee

566th plenary session of the European Economic and Social Committee – Interactio, 19.1.2022–20.1.2022

2022/C 194/01

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Developing artificial intelligence in European micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) (own-initiative opinion)

1

2022/C 194/02

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Next Generation SME Strategy — Enhancing Effective and Swift Delivery (own-initiative opinion)

7

2022/C 194/03

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on EURES — for a better integration of labour markets (own-initiative opinion)

14

2022/C 194/04

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Towards a new care model for older people: learning from COVID-19 (own-initiative opinion)

19

2022/C 194/05

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Rule of law and the recovery fund (own-initiative opinion)

27

2022/C 194/06

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on How will the identified industrial ecosystems contribute to the strategic autonomy of the EU and the well-being of Europeans? (exploratory opinion)

34

2022/C 194/07

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Innovative financial instruments as part of the development of social impact companies (exploratory opinion)

39

2022/C 194/08

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on The benefits of the outermost regions for the EU (exploratory opinion)

44

2022/C 194/09

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work (exploratory opinion requested by the French presidency)

50

2022/C 194/10

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Food security and sustainable food systems (exploratory opinion requested by the French presidency)

72

---

| | III   Preparatory acts |
| --- | --- |
| | European Economic and Social Committee |
| | 566th plenary session of the European Economic and Social Committee – Interactio, 19.1.2022–20.1.2022 |
| 2022/C 194/11 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2019/631 as regards strengthening the CO2 emission performance standards for new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles in line with the Union’s increased climate ambition [COM(2021) 556 final — 2021/0197(COD)] | 81 |
| 2022/C 194/12 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the 2030 Policy Programme Path to the Digital Decade(COM(2021) 574 final — 2021/0293 (COD)) | 87 |
| 2022/C 194/13 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Council Directive restructuring the Union framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity [COM(2021) 563 final — 2021/0213 (CNS)] | 92 |
| 2022/C 194/14 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Recommendation for a Council recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area (COM(2021) 742 final) | 97 |
| 2022/C 194/15 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — NAIADES III: Boosting future-proof European inland waterway transport [COM(2021) 324 final] | 102 |
| 2022/C 194/16 | Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2020/1429 as regards the duration of the reference period for the application of temporary measures concerning the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure(COM(2021) 832 final — 2021/0437(COD)) | 107 |

III   Preparatory acts

European Economic and Social Committee

566th plenary session of the European Economic and Social Committee – Interactio, 19.1.2022–20.1.2022

2022/C 194/11

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2019/631 as regards strengthening the CO2 emission performance standards for new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles in line with the Union’s increased climate ambition [COM(2021) 556 final — 2021/0197(COD)]

2

[COM(2021) 556 final — 2021/0197(COD)]

81

2022/C 194/12

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the 2030 Policy Programme Path to the Digital Decade(COM(2021) 574 final — 2021/0293 (COD))

(COM(2021) 574 final — 2021/0293 (COD))

87

2022/C 194/13

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Council Directive restructuring the Union framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity [COM(2021) 563 final — 2021/0213 (CNS)]

[COM(2021) 563 final — 2021/0213 (CNS)]

92

2022/C 194/14

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Recommendation for a Council recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area (COM(2021) 742 final)

(COM(2021) 742 final)

97

2022/C 194/15

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — NAIADES III: Boosting future-proof European inland waterway transport [COM(2021) 324 final]

[COM(2021) 324 final]

102

2022/C 194/16

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2020/1429 as regards the duration of the reference period for the application of temporary measures concerning the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure(COM(2021) 832 final — 2021/0437(COD))

(COM(2021) 832 final — 2021/0437(COD))

107

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN

---

I Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

OPINIONS

European Economic and Social Committee

566th plenary session of the European Economic and Social Committee – Interactio, 19.1.2022–20.1.2022

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/1

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Developing artificial intelligence in European micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs)’

(own-initiative opinion)

(2022/C 194/01)

| Rapporteur: | Marie-Françoise GONDARD-ARGENTI |
| --- | --- |

Rapporteur:

Marie-Françoise GONDARD-ARGENTI

| Plenary assembly decision | 25.3.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Rule 32(2) of the Rules of Procedure |
| | Own-initiative opinion |
| Section responsible | Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption |
| Adopted in section | 13.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 238/0/3 |

Plenary assembly decision

25.3.2021

Legal basis

Rule 32(2) of the Rules of Procedure

Own-initiative opinion

Section responsible

Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption

Adopted in section

13.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

19.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

238/0/3

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) points out that micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) will take up artificial intelligence (AI) to the extent that it is reliable, inclusive and sustainable, and if it forms part of an environmentally-friendly economic and social set-up — a factor in business development, employability and better quality of life and health for all workers and European citizens. Respect for fundamental and social rights and stronger transparency requirements will foster trust and ownership of AI by all citizens and MSMEs. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | The EESC underlines that the self-employed and micro, small and medium-sized enterprises across all sectors account for 99 % of EU businesses, two-thirds of private sector jobs and more than half of the added value created by EU enterprises. Exposed to a form of competition radically altered by the digitalisation of the economy, they nevertheless have a key role to play in the EU’s digital and green transition in order to meet the challenges ahead. They must therefore be given equal access to AI, as otherwise Europe will be deprived of its most valuable economic, social and human resources. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | The EESC pointed out in its opinion on the revised coordinated plan (1) that the widespread adoption of AI by MSMEs is the key to Europe’s industrial renewal. Despite their agility, MSMEs concerned about the digital transition face significant internal and external challenges: costs, lack of broadband infrastructure in certain territories, access to finance, human resources, information, training, etc. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | The EESC calls for MSMEs to be provided with simple tools and accessible funding to help them integrate this technology which, though expensive, is essential to maintain and even strengthen their competitiveness. Access to data of sufficient quality and quantity, as well as full-scale trials, is a priority. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | The EESC considers that effective support for MSMEs in adopting AI requires strong political will at all levels, close cooperation with all stakeholders in organised civil society and high-quality social dialogue in the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | The variety of MSMEs across different sectors requires tailored and targeted support for AI, as well as smart and inclusive legislation, which are key elements in ensuring legal certainty and trust. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | The EESC recommends the rapid dissemination among all stakeholders, and business managers in particular, of the ‘toolbox’ — an educational tool featuring in the EESC study on this subject (2) and describing the different stages in the use of AI by MSMEs. Such tools serve to dispel any anxieties about this technology and change perceptions in this area. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

2.   General comments

| 2.1. | The study Boosting the use of artificial intelligence in Europe’s micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, published by the EESC, analyses five sectors (agriculture, construction, healthcare, legal services and accounting) in five Member States (Italy, France, Ireland, Romania and Sweden). The recommendations for a ‘toolbox’ are achievable for policy-makers and MSMEs alike. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | The SME report 2021 published by the European Commission (EC) in July (3) clearly identifies the current situation in terms of digital uptake by MSMEs in the 27 EU Member States on the basis of two surveys, conducted during the first phase of the pandemic and the last quarter of 2020. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | Europe’s 25 million MSMEs, which are pillars of the EU economy and represent around 100 million jobs and almost 57 % of European GDP, play a key role in value creation across all sectors (from independent traditional crafts to the social economy, i.e. 2,8 million businesses, high-tech start-ups, etc.), and call for tailored and targeted support, as well as smart and inclusive legislation, ensuring legal certainty, trust and quality of life for workers. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | The EESC hopes that the measures taken by the Commission and the Member States will continue to be implemented at grassroots level. The above-mentioned toolbox should encourage public authorities to experiment with tailored initiatives in collaboration with civil society and relevant businesses. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

| 2.5. | Ensuring the transformation of industries, AI often remains inaccessible to MSMEs: their agility comes up against difficulties both internal (human resources, costs, access to quality data, etc.) and external (access to broadband infrastructure, finance, information, training, etc.). |
| --- | --- |

2.5.

| 2.6. | The widespread adoption of AI by MSMEs is the key to Europe’s industrial renewal (4), as the most vulnerable, the self-employed, micro-enterprises, family structures, businesses far from urban centres as well as social economy enterprises deserve special attention to avoid discrimination that would have disastrous economic and social repercussions for the EU as a whole. |
| --- | --- |

2.6.

| 2.7. | Instilling a climate of trust is of the utmost importance for including MSMEs in the strategy of excellence and leadership strived for by the EU. This requires the mobilisation of all institutional actors, from the European Commission to national governments and regional and local structures, in order to provide tools and support targeted according to size and to ensure support and guarantees for investment. Bridging the digital divide and integrating networks to close the gap between MSMEs and larger entities in terms of AI are of key importance. |
| --- | --- |

2.7.

| 2.8. | Trust arises from a strong political will to work closely at all levels: organised civil society, social partners, associations, chambers of commerce, professional organisations, groupings, etc., which are on the ground, well known and recognised by both employers and by employees of MSMEs, are best placed to inform workers and employers about risks and challenges depending on the sector of activity. They have all the competences needed to inform policy decisions at all levels, so that these meet MSMEs’ needs in relation to AI. The EESC believes that it would be in the Member States’ interest to foster high-quality social and contractual dialogue in order to maximise the impact of policies aimed at MSMEs. |
| --- | --- |

2.8.

| 2.9. | The importance of effectively targeting European programmes at MSMEs (5), such as Digital Europe and Horizon Europe, is of obvious value. All tools must be mobilised in a form that is simple to use. |
| --- | --- |

2.9.

| 2.10. | The increasing sophistication of algorithms affects data quality and protection, and even security and transparency, raising many ethical concerns (discrimination, increasing social inequalities, doubts over the autonomy of human decisions, etc.). These challenges which require everyone, including MSMEs, to be highly vigilant, should not delay the uptake of AI by these enterprises. |
| --- | --- |

2.10.

| 2.11. | Many of the EESC’s recommendations are supported by the results of the above-mentioned study:






  — | adoption of AI by MSMEs depends primarily on their managers’ and employees’ capacity to use it, including in relation to the risks, in advance of the deployment of these technologies; |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.11.

—

adoption of AI by MSMEs depends primarily on their managers’ and employees’ capacity to use it, including in relation to the risks, in advance of the deployment of these technologies;

| — | only appropriate funding will compensate for the disadvantages in terms of size and maturity that de facto hamper the growth of AI in MSMEs. In this regard, the EESC welcomes the EUR 1,98 billion announced by the European Commission under the Digital Europe Programme (6). Innovation hubs offer the best access to the latest digital capacities and training of stakeholders; |
| --- | --- |

—

only appropriate funding will compensate for the disadvantages in terms of size and maturity that de facto hamper the growth of AI in MSMEs. In this regard, the EESC welcomes the EUR 1,98 billion announced by the European Commission under the Digital Europe Programme (6). Innovation hubs offer the best access to the latest digital capacities and training of stakeholders;

| — | MSMEs need high-quality external databases. The EESC has already stressed the importance of ensuring universal access to public sector big data, establishing robust programming interfaces (APIs) and even European platforms for secure data sharing (7), such as Gaia-X. It has also proposed a mutualised approach to data management and exchange and stressed the importance of developing altruistic data (8); |
| --- | --- |

—

MSMEs need high-quality external databases. The EESC has already stressed the importance of ensuring universal access to public sector big data, establishing robust programming interfaces (APIs) and even European platforms for secure data sharing (7), such as Gaia-X. It has also proposed a mutualised approach to data management and exchange and stressed the importance of developing altruistic data (8);

| — | for the provision of AI technology, access to data, standardisation and access to finance, MSMEs need clear and uniform rules across the European market, which are conditions for healthy competition, in turn generating growth and jobs. In addition, they must participate as early as possible in the development of standards and regulation at European level. Clear and transparent solutions to ethical and accountability issues will make it possible to gain the trust of citizens and consumers, encouraging MSMEs to adopt AI. |
| --- | --- |

—

for the provision of AI technology, access to data, standardisation and access to finance, MSMEs need clear and uniform rules across the European market, which are conditions for healthy competition, in turn generating growth and jobs. In addition, they must participate as early as possible in the development of standards and regulation at European level. Clear and transparent solutions to ethical and accountability issues will make it possible to gain the trust of citizens and consumers, encouraging MSMEs to adopt AI.

| 2.12. | The EESC supports the recommendations of the above study, stressing that they require a particularly active and consistent political will:






  — | to use education and vocational training to promote a general mastery of AI by citizens, so that all parts of civil society, including MSMEs, are able to freely adopt it, and act in a competent and responsible manner in this connection. It is essential to complement academic training with practical arrangements and to provide suitable and affordable continuing training for self-employed workers, managers of MSMEs and their employees (9). With regard to managers, their access to external expertise should be facilitated through B2B partnerships, an IA accessible to all, and the availability of AI as a Service; |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.12.

—

to use education and vocational training to promote a general mastery of AI by citizens, so that all parts of civil society, including MSMEs, are able to freely adopt it, and act in a competent and responsible manner in this connection. It is essential to complement academic training with practical arrangements and to provide suitable and affordable continuing training for self-employed workers, managers of MSMEs and their employees (9). With regard to managers, their access to external expertise should be facilitated through B2B partnerships, an IA accessible to all, and the availability of AI as a Service;

| — | to ensure that MSMEs have easy access to both public and private funding and to generate synergies for them in EU funding; |
| --- | --- |

—

to ensure that MSMEs have easy access to both public and private funding and to generate synergies for them in EU funding;

| — | to guarantee the necessary infrastructure and connections in all areas, including rural areas, in order to prevent a digital divide and provide access to relevant and interoperable data, of which agriculture in particular is a major user; |
| --- | --- |

—

to guarantee the necessary infrastructure and connections in all areas, including rural areas, in order to prevent a digital divide and provide access to relevant and interoperable data, of which agriculture in particular is a major user;

| — | to ensure good coordination between all actors and levels; |
| --- | --- |

—

to ensure good coordination between all actors and levels;

| — | to promote general awareness of cybersecurity issues (10), as well as the economic and societal damage caused by biased data and other potential emerging risks. Human diversity in the design of AI tools is an essential means of improving data quality; |
| --- | --- |

—

to promote general awareness of cybersecurity issues (10), as well as the economic and societal damage caused by biased data and other potential emerging risks. Human diversity in the design of AI tools is an essential means of improving data quality;

| — | to widely disseminate best practices and success stories on the ground, facilitating the sharing of feedback to kick-start the widespread adoption of AI by MSMEs. |
| --- | --- |

—

to widely disseminate best practices and success stories on the ground, facilitating the sharing of feedback to kick-start the widespread adoption of AI by MSMEs.

| 2.13. | The EESC would like to draw the attention of the European institutions to the following principles of action regarding AI:






  — | to start small, in order to inspire adequate and proportionate policies, even if it means adapting them for larger companies at a later stage; |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.13.

—

to start small, in order to inspire adequate and proportionate policies, even if it means adapting them for larger companies at a later stage;

| — | to increase legal certainty and promote a good understanding of the rules in order to facilitate uptake by businesses and support investments to develop innovation and AI; |
| --- | --- |

—

to increase legal certainty and promote a good understanding of the rules in order to facilitate uptake by businesses and support investments to develop innovation and AI;

| — | to facilitate understanding of AI by all through better coordination and increased synergies between policy instruments and initiatives, using a specific MSME platform; |
| --- | --- |

—

to facilitate understanding of AI by all through better coordination and increased synergies between policy instruments and initiatives, using a specific MSME platform;

| — | to promote full-scale trials upstream through operational engagement protocols, among other things. The EESC highlights the importance of testing sites and regulatory ‘sandboxes’ that enable experimentation and piloting of new ideas (11) as well as the need to evaluate these tools in order to better adapt them (12). The digital innovation hubs, Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) and on-demand platforms need to work in close coordination to support SMEs in their implementation efforts; |
| --- | --- |

—

to promote full-scale trials upstream through operational engagement protocols, among other things. The EESC highlights the importance of testing sites and regulatory ‘sandboxes’ that enable experimentation and piloting of new ideas (11) as well as the need to evaluate these tools in order to better adapt them (12). The digital innovation hubs, Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) and on-demand platforms need to work in close coordination to support SMEs in their implementation efforts;

| — | to promote a pan-European approach by completing the European Single Market and adjusting policies to the needs of the Member States, from the development of AI to its adoption; |
| --- | --- |

—

to promote a pan-European approach by completing the European Single Market and adjusting policies to the needs of the Member States, from the development of AI to its adoption;

| — | to allow open data access while respecting data protection and ownership and increasing data flows to feed AI-based systems; |
| --- | --- |

—

to allow open data access while respecting data protection and ownership and increasing data flows to feed AI-based systems;

| — | to guarantee a transparent European Single Market to reduce risks and increase transferability of AI solutions to MSMEs. The interoperability of essential digital infrastructures is a key condition. |
| --- | --- |

—

to guarantee a transparent European Single Market to reduce risks and increase transferability of AI solutions to MSMEs. The interoperability of essential digital infrastructures is a key condition.

3.   Specific comments (13)

3.1.   Agriculture

| 3.1.1. | The agricultural sector, which features a wealth of family-run MSMEs (96 % of farms in 2016), faces a number of challenges: demographics, climate change, attractiveness and competitiveness. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.1.

| 3.1.2. | In view of the proven benefits of AI and robotics in this sector, it is advisable to provide continuous help to farmers and their employees in supporting these changes, to develop training in this area and appropriate education on the sharing and aggregation of data (14), while exploring new ways of sharing costs such as cooperative solutions. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.2.

3.2.   Construction

| 3.2.1. | This labour-intensive sector could benefit more from digitalisation: 36 % of companies in the sector have adopted at least one AI technology, compared to 42 % across all sectors. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.1.

| 3.2.2. | Building information modelling (BIM), which is increasingly important for the sector and used by 29 % of enterprises in 2016, requires massive investment in training and in ensuring open and non-discriminatory access to electronic planning software via open and standardised interfaces (‘open BIM’), so as not to compromise market access for MSMEs. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.2.

| 3.2.3. | The characteristics of this sector and its potential could make it a showcase for a green and digitalised Europe if the prerequisites for securing market access are ensured in terms of technology and public procurement law. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.3.

3.3.   Health

| 3.3.1. | In the field of health, more than elsewhere, innovation must meet ethical and safety requirements, from design to use. The development of an AI sector in the field of health requires access to sufficient and high-quality data. Territorial ‘sandbox’ experiments would be welcome to help MSMEs in this regard. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.1.

| 3.3.2. | Particularly active in medical equipment (95 % of the 32 000 companies in the sector) and services, MSMEs are at the forefront of innovation and productivity (47 % of companies have already adopted AI technology). |
| --- | --- |

3.3.2.

| 3.3.3. | However, MSMEs in the sector are confronted with the high cost of R & D and long innovation cycles, complex marketing authorisation procedures and the binding GDPR framework. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.3.

| 3.3.4. | The creation of a European space for reliable health data, as well as the recruitment of ‘hybrid’ employees with a mastery of both the job and digital techniques, would foster innovative solutions, including in MSMEs, as a source of savings for more sustainable and resilient care systems (15). |
| --- | --- |

3.3.4.

3.4.   Liberal professions (16)

| 3.4.1. | Given the very sensitive nature of data held by liberal professionals, the stakes in terms of privacy, confidentiality, transparency and non-discrimination are particularly acute in this sector. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.1.

| 3.4.2. | The use of AI for automation of the most tedious tasks should allow liberal professionals to refocus on the core business of their profession to meet the needs of their clients/patients even more effectively. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.2.

| 3.4.3. | As highlighted in the EESC Opinion on Liberal Professions 4.0 (17), AI raises questions for the special relationship of trust between the liberal professional and his or her client, as well as the concepts of independence and professional responsibility. This entails reviewing the ethical rules by incorporating technical and ethical aspects related to AI and setting new training and skills requirements (data security and quality, personal data protection, cybersecurity, etc.). |
| --- | --- |

3.4.3.

3.5.   Legal advice

| 3.5.1. | Despite sustained and independent growth through economic cycles (2,6 % per year between 2014 and 2018), progress in this sector has been slowed by the problems of transparency and bias that have affected AI since its inception in an area where confidence is based on direct human contact. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.1.

3.6.   Accounting/management control

| 3.6.1. | This sector, with 640 000 companies operating in Europe in 2018, is dominated by MSMEs. Given that around half of accounting tasks could be automated, AI represents an opportunity in terms of added value and would allow professionals to refocus on providing advice to clients. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.1.

| 3.6.2. | The formation of hybrid profiles combining law or accounting with IT would be of great value in both sectors, in particular to prevent the risk of data piracy in the latter. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.2.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  OJ C 517, 22.12.2021, p. 56.

1

(2)  EESC Call for tender No CES/FSA/02/2020; author: Space Tec Partners.

2

(3)  Annual Report on European SMEs 2020/2021, European Commission, July 2021.

3

(4)  Opinion on the revision of the Commission’s coordinated AI plan (OJ C 517, 22.12.2021, p. 56).

4

(5)  EESC opinion (OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 210).

5

(6)  Announcement of 10 November 2021 by Commissioner Thierry Breton.

6

(7)  See: OJ C 240, 16.7.2019, p. 51.

7

(8)  As defined in recital 36 of the Commission proposal for a Regulation on data governance, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52020PC0767

8

(9)  EESC opinion (OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 1).

9

(10)  Cf. points 4.7 and 4.8 of EESC opinion (OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 1).

10

(11)  See: OJ C 240, 16.7.2019, p. 51.

11

(12)  See: OJ C 240, 16.7.2019, p. 51.

12

(13)  These specific comments concern the different sectors analysed in the above-mentioned EESC study.

13

(14)  Farmers, despite being major users of satellite data and automation, are apparently reluctant to share their data, according to the 2021 report on Artificial intelligence — state of the art and the outlook for France.

14

Artificial intelligence — state of the art and the outlook for France

(15)  Cf. in particular the EESC opinion published in OJ C 341, 24.8.2021, p. 76, the opinion published in OJ C 517, 22.12.2021, p. 56 on the AI coordinated plan, and also European Commission’s Strategic Foresight Report, 2021.

15

(16)  Defined by the CJEU as follows: the liberal professions are ‘activities which, inter alia, are of a marked intellectual character, require a high-level qualification and are usually subject to clear and strict professional regulation’ (C 267/99, I-7467, 2001).

16

(17)  OJ C 286, 16.7.2021, p. 8.

17

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/7

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Next Generation SME Strategy — Enhancing Effective and Swift Delivery

(own-initiative opinion)

(2022/C 194/02)

| Rapporteur: | Milena ANGELOVA |
| --- | --- |
| Co-rapporteur: | Panagiotis GKOFAS |

Rapporteur:

Milena ANGELOVA

Co-rapporteur:

Panagiotis GKOFAS

| Plenary Assembly decision | 25.3.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Rule 32(2) of the Rules of Procedure |
| | Own-initiative opinion |
| Section responsible | Single Market, Production and Consumption |
| Adopted in section | 13.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 235/1/7 |

Plenary Assembly decision

25.3.2021

Legal basis

Rule 32(2) of the Rules of Procedure

Own-initiative opinion

Section responsible

Single Market, Production and Consumption

Adopted in section

13.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

19.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

235/1/7

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | SMEs are the backbone of the EU economy — hence, the economic recovery depends largely on how successfully they will adapt and operate in the new post-pandemic reality, shaped by the profound changes imposed by the digital and green transitions. To be able not only to survive, but also to thrive, grow and expand successfully, driving the EU economy forward, and creating quality jobs and well-being for the citizens, SMEs need extra efforts by the EU and the Member States to provide them with a favourable business environment and proper funding and support measures. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | A fit for the future policy and regulatory framework need to provide SMEs with certainty, consistency, clarity, and a level playing field, respecting the principles of better regulation (1) and competitiveness checks when introducing new or revising existing policy measures, while maintaining high level of standard of environmental and social protection. The EESC calls for streamlined administrative procedures so as to avoid focusing resources on activities that hamper efforts to develop business. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | The EESC reiterates its proposal to create and develop a network of ‘financial and funding ombudsmen’, who would monitor implementation of the measures geared towards improving the short-term liquidity of SMEs. Such a network would: promote SMEs’ access to funds; collect and analyse qualitative data to learn if and how intermediary banks use financial instruments to reach the SMEs most in need of financial resources and why credit is not granted to them; and may also mediate more overarching disputes between SMEs and financing and funding providers. The EESC suggests that the EC and Member States draw up and implement swiftly a one-sheet-application process for SMEs, to ease and accelerate their access to EU funds. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | The EESC sees enabling the fluid operation of both internal and international markets as an important short-term policy measure and calls on the Member States to make a special effort to provide opportunities for SMEs to bid for and win public contracts, and speed up public investments in general so as to increase the companies’ turnover, together with effective application of the Late Payments Directive (2). The EESC welcomes the EC’s proposal to extend the State aid Temporary Framework to June 2022, providing a bridge to market-based post-COVID-19 conditions. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | The EESC stresses that enhancing competences and skills, including digital and green skills, is key for SMEs. This need applies to entrepreneurs, enterprise managers and workers alike. The demand for new skills requires both adjustment in vocational education and training and upskilling and reskilling. Social dialogue plays an important role in skills development, and good VET practices should be promoted and exchanged through relevant EU initiatives in cooperation between SME organisations, the social partners and Member States. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | In particular, micro and small enterprises, family and traditional businesses and social economy enterprises need practical grassroots-level support, specific campaigns, tools and advice. Much more should be done to ensure the availability and accessibility of sufficient and applicable advisory services — also with the indispensable support of the SME organisations. The EESC welcomes the launch of the Social Economy Action Plan (3) by the EC. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | Enhancing networking, cooperation and partnerships with other businesses and stakeholders also help speed up the recovery, digitalisation and greening capacity of SMEs, including through close involvement of SMEs in preparing the transition pathways for industrial ecosystems. While the COVID-19 pandemic has boosted the uptake of digitalisation for the digital frontrunners among SMEs, it has also deepened the digital divide for those that were lagging behind. There is also an underlined need for a more in-depth work to assess the chances and challenges that SMEs, especially the most vulnerable ones with least resources, face due to the green transition, and to support their success in this endeavour. The process can be facilitated and assisted by the SMEs representative organisations — and special support measures and funding for joint actions should be designed and offered to them for that. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

| 1.8. | The EESC underlines the pivotal role of the SME Envoy network, EEN and SME organisations to publicise and spread information on all support measures to the widest possible audience of SMEs and calls for them to develop their structures and working methods so as to better meet these needs. The EESC suggests that relations between SME organisations at EU and national level and the SME Envoy network should be further strengthened, with a view of achieving a more interactive model, where there is a constant, direct link and consistent, close and comprehensive connection with SMEs and their representative organisations and a better understanding and recognition of the role of the SME Envoy. It is the SME Envoys who will translate and tailor EU policies in concrete measures and support schemes in their relevant Member States and arrange the practical measures to deal with the particular situation of each and every SME, so that no one is left behind. The EESC looks forward to soon seeing the appointment of an EU SME Envoy to really lead this process. |
| --- | --- |

1.8.

2.   Background

| 2.1. | The EESC called for the elaboration of a ‘Next Generation EU Strategy for SMEs’ that would respond to the new situation (4), as the EC launched the EU SME strategy just before the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic (5). Furthermore, when concluding the work on the 2021-2027 MFF and on the recovery and resilience national plans under NextGenerationEU, it is important to assess whether the goal of placing SME support measures at the heart of all these programmes has really been achieved. This is especially urgent and important as many recommendations and proposals made by SME representative organisations still need to be better integrated at EU, national and regional level to safeguard prompt and successful delivery. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | This EESC own-initiative opinion focuses, by building on the previous opinion (6), and without repeating its recommendations, on how to better meet SMEs’ promotion and support needs. These needs arise not only from the new post-COVID-19 reality, but also from the fact that the EU’s SMEs, which have an important role to play in the recovery and resilience of the economy and society at EU and Member State level, must comply with one of the most complicated legislative frameworks. It discusses how EU funds and other policy support measures help tap the potential of SMEs and what can be done to accelerate implementation and guarantee successful and swift delivery on the SME strategy, including possible adjustments based on recent experiences and developments. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

3.   Challenges, opportunities and the varying capacities of SMEs

| 3.1. | SMEs face serious challenges with respect not only to the economic recovery from the pandemic and the adaptation to the new post-pandemic circumstances, but also to the digital and green transitions and demographic change. The new situation also generates opportunities for SMEs, especially if there are adequate support measures, tailored to the significant differences in the characteristics of SMEs and their capacities to recover, digitalise and become greener (7). |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

| 3.2. | The pandemic has changed the operating environment of SMEs in a radical way, due to the remarkable changes it has also caused in global markets and the increase in costs of energy and freight, recently aggravated by rising inflation and negative interest rates. Moreover, SMEs have been hit by: drops in customer demand and revenue, impacting negatively cash flow and capital availability, supply chain disruptions (raw material shortages and increased prices), and challenges related to balancing employee capacity, welfare and skills mismatches. Liquidity shortages, payment delays and increased demand for finance are also major challenges that have been aggravated during the pandemic. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.

| 3.3. | SMEs are widely diverse and heterogeneous and their capacity to recover and develop also varies, depending on whether they produce goods and services for consumer markets or provide intermediate goods to larger firms. Furthermore, the recovery of SMEs that mainly operate at national or even local level is strongly dependent on the revival of domestic conditions, while those trading in the Single Market are affected by its fluid operation and those operating internationally will count on the repair, nearshoring or diversification of disrupted international value chains and the swift implementation of FTAs. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.

| 3.4. | Regrettably, the level of digitalisation of EU-27 SMEs trails behind that of their peers in the UK, Norway, the US and Asia. While the pandemic period has helped raise awareness of the significance of digitalisation, it has also deepened the digital divide between the frontrunners and the followers, and the problem of insufficient expertise and resources in SMEs to benefit from it remains, i.e., due to the lack of:






  — | awareness, skills development and availability of digital technology and tools required for digitalisation; |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.4.

—

awareness, skills development and availability of digital technology and tools required for digitalisation;

| — | good connectivity, digital tools and services; |
| --- | --- |

—

good connectivity, digital tools and services;

| — | time and funding; |
| --- | --- |

—

time and funding;

| — | capability to combine a digital strategy with a concrete business model (including the inability to integrate new technology with existing technology and business processes or to migrate from previous systems/decommission old technologies). |
| --- | --- |

—

capability to combine a digital strategy with a concrete business model (including the inability to integrate new technology with existing technology and business processes or to migrate from previous systems/decommission old technologies).

| 3.5. | An SME survey’s findings prove the validity of the EESC’s earlier conclusions (8), as 72 % of SMEs are of the opinion that better access to public support schemes would be useful to allow them to pursue digitalisation, together with support to find the required skills or expertise and gain access to networks (for 61 % and 62 %), and assistance with fundraising (50 %). All SMEs would benefit more from grants and subsidised public funding than from financial instruments. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.

| 3.6. | Intangible business assets, such as image or long-term relationships with customers to meet constantly changing and increasing needs and the increased level of competition due to sustainability, are also increasingly important for SMEs. Digitalisation and greening go hand in hand in that digitalisation helps enterprises optimise the use of resources and reduce environmental impacts, while the negative impacts of digitalisation on the climate and the environment also have to be tackled, mostly at a wider system level. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.

| 3.7. | Many SMEs face uncertainty and lack of knowledge and understanding of the specific climate and environmental policies, including the requirements of all the new financial tools. The Green Deal and the Fit for 55 package, among others, may affect SMEs through direct requirements or indirectly through increased costs of resources, while improved efficiency in energy and material use and logistics may also result in cost savings, and more sustainable products may create benefits in the markets, depending on the expectations of customers. The increase in both domestic and global demand for environmental and climate technologies and solutions is an opportunity for businesses that provide other businesses or the public sector with solutions. There is also a clear trend of growing sustainability expectations by investors and financiers. |
| --- | --- |

3.7.

| 3.8. | Furthermore, an SME’s positioning in the digital and green transitions is affected by the:






  — | SME’s size which affects the availability and accessibility of resources. While micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises are similar in terms of the proportion of value added they generate, the number of enterprises in each of these categories differs considerably (93,3 %, 5,7 % and 0,9 % respectively, in 2020). The predominance of micro-enterprises, which have fewest resources, shows the nature and size of the challenges; |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.8.

—

SME’s size which affects the availability and accessibility of resources. While micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises are similar in terms of the proportion of value added they generate, the number of enterprises in each of these categories differs considerably (93,3 %, 5,7 % and 0,9 % respectively, in 2020). The predominance of micro-enterprises, which have fewest resources, shows the nature and size of the challenges;

| — | differences in market positions and the sectors they operate — e.g., enterprises that develop and provide technologies and solutions for digitalisation and greening are in a different position to those that take up and use these solutions; |
| --- | --- |

—

differences in market positions and the sectors they operate — e.g., enterprises that develop and provide technologies and solutions for digitalisation and greening are in a different position to those that take up and use these solutions;

| — | age and growth intensity of enterprises. Start-ups and scale-ups are more likely to use advanced digital technologies than other SMEs; |
| --- | --- |

—

age and growth intensity of enterprises. Start-ups and scale-ups are more likely to use advanced digital technologies than other SMEs;

| — | overall business environment, which must be attractive and supportive for entrepreneurship, innovation, investment and trade; |
| --- | --- |

—

overall business environment, which must be attractive and supportive for entrepreneurship, innovation, investment and trade;

| — | differences between the Member States — in terms of the digital transition, these mainly refer to digital infrastructure and digital skills, while differences in terms of the green transition stem from, for example, the natural resource intensity of the economy and different traditions and cultures in environmental management; |
| --- | --- |

—

differences between the Member States — in terms of the digital transition, these mainly refer to digital infrastructure and digital skills, while differences in terms of the green transition stem from, for example, the natural resource intensity of the economy and different traditions and cultures in environmental management;

| — | various locations — the framework conditions for SMEs differ e.g., between cities and rural areas. |
| --- | --- |

—

various locations — the framework conditions for SMEs differ e.g., between cities and rural areas.

| 3.9. | As EU entrepreneurs are ageing, the EC should promote and facilitate business transfers as they benefit the whole economy by safeguarding employment and companies, and help SMEs meet future needs, as they may mean better preparedness and skills for digitalisation, greening and business renewal. Through a successful business transfer the business model can be upgraded and transformed to become digital and sustainable while failed or unrealised business transfers ultimately lead to the loss of jobs and economic growth. Promoting diversity in entrepreneurship — e.g., to include women and third country nationals, can bring value added and speed up growth of several sectors in strategic industries and business sectors. Social economy models such as worker-owned cooperatives have a role to play, as well. |
| --- | --- |

3.9.

4.   Key principles for a successful Next Generation SME Strategy

| 4.1. | The EESC calls on the EC and the Member States to accelerate the implementation of the SME strategy and have it adjusted according to the various conditions, capacities and needs of SMEs, in line with the principles set out below. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.

| 4.2. | Any measures boosting recovery and resilience at the EU and national levels should promote economically, socially and environmentally sustainable development. While public investment and funding play an essential role, this must not obscure the importance of private investment and the need for a favourable business environment, especially at times when disruptive processes also have to be properly governed. As a general rule, EU policy measures should lead towards a sustainable post-pandemic economy, based on innovation, skills and competition rather than on State aid and protectionism. |
| --- | --- |

4.2.

| 4.3. | As businesses play a vital economic and societal role by generating jobs and improving overall wellbeing, support measures that enable them to thrive must be at the heart of EU policies. This call is also justified by the fact that businesses are core players in achieving both the twin transitions and the objective of a competitive, digital, climate-neutral and circular economy. Market mechanisms are increasingly steering this development, supported by responsible social dialogue. |
| --- | --- |

4.3.

| 4.4. | Considering that SMEs account for 53 % of the value added and 65 % of the employment generated by all businesses in the EU (in 2020), their crucial role in the EU economy and its successful recovery is undeniable. Special attention should be devoted to the particular needs of micro-SMEs (93 % of all SMEs) and to enhance their role as the main driver of the social economy. As the SMEs and large companies are interlinked in many ways, more efficient integration in the relevant ecosystems and value chains is mutually beneficial. |
| --- | --- |

4.4.

| 4.5. | As SMEs differ greatly in their recovery, digitalisation and greening capacities, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. Support measures need to consider that the overall capacity of SMEs depends on the nature, extent and cause of the enterprise’s losses during the pandemic (often sector-specific); the enterprise’s position in the markets, value chains and business ecosystems; the role and level of the enterprise in the digital and green transitions; the enterprise’s financial, physical and human resources; and the operating environment in the Member State in question. |
| --- | --- |

4.5.

| 4.6. | As the short-term implications of the pandemic have not yet been tackled, it is still important to help sound businesses survive the current situation. At the same time, conditions to enable and support the longer-term digital and green transition need to be enhanced immediately. SMEs should thus be at the heart of the implementation of both short-term and mid- to long-term EU funding and other policy measures. |
| --- | --- |

4.6.

| 4.7. | The COVID-19 crisis has emphasised the need to support businesses and entrepreneurs in financial distress to avoid unnecessary bankruptcies and to save jobs. EESC calls on the EC and the Member States to continue their work on removing obstacles for entrepreneurs’ second chance and restart, and to swiftly and properly implement the Directive on restructuring and insolvency (9), which encourages Member States to create early warning systems to enable timely help for entrepreneurs in distress. |
| --- | --- |

4.7.

5.   Enabling a sound business environment

| 5.1. | The SME strategy is closely linked to the industrial strategy, and they need to be developed and implemented simultaneously in terms of creating favourable conditions for doing business, including a well-functioning single market of goods, services, capital, data and people, a smooth twin transition, and the open strategic autonomy of the EU in the key industrial sectors and related SME value chains. The close involvement of SMEs in preparing the transition pathways for industrial ecosystems is a must. |
| --- | --- |

5.1.

| 5.2. | Member States can help accelerate SMEs’ development by providing them with increased opportunities to bid for and win public contracts, at both EU and national level and by speeding up public investments in general so that the turnover of the companies involved is boosted more quickly. The rules laid down in the Late Payments Directive as regards payments by public administrations to businesses, require stricter enforcement and new remedies need to be envisaged, also targeted at speeding up transactions among private companies. Increasing the speed of payments can further improve SMEs’ liquidity. |
| --- | --- |

5.2.

| 5.3. | The mutual recognition of goods can ensure the free movement of goods in the EU, but many SMEs still face difficulties in entering the market in other Member States due to burdensome national administrative procedures. The EESC highlights the significance of standardisation in removing market barriers and facilitating cross-border activities. The effective participation of stakeholders such as SMEs should be further promoted in the standardisation processes, both at EU and international level. Standards should be drafted in an SME-friendly way and support and guidance should be provided for the application of standards in SMEs. |
| --- | --- |

5.3.

| 5.4. | International trade plays an important role in boosting the growth and development of businesses and the EU economy. In addition to addressing the pandemic-related obstacles, longer-term bilateral and multilateral negotiations for open and rule-based trade need to be continued to enhance the market access, internationalisation and growth of SMEs. |
| --- | --- |

5.4.

| 5.5. | To be able to achieve its objectives, while addressing numerous challenges in terms of costs and transparency, the Next Generation SME Strategy must be accompanied by an enabling and encouraging regulatory framework, which promotes the efficient and swift recovery of SMEs and their development and ability to employ. The EESC emphasises that the policy and regulatory framework need to provide SMEs with certainty, consistency and clarity, to comply with the Better Regulation agenda (10), including competitiveness checks and an assessment of the cumulative impacts of various initiatives, and to fully implement the SBA and ‘once only’ principle, while maintaining high standard of environmental and social protection and securing a level playing field. The regulation must also consider the size of the playing field, thus assessing whether some specific rules should be the same for all companies, or shall be tailored according to the companies’ size. The EESC also calls for streamlined administrative procedures to avoid focusing resources on activities that do not enhance but instead hinder efforts to develop business. |
| --- | --- |

5.5.

| 5.6. | The better coordination of measures between Member States in the single market during unforeseen circumstances such as the pandemic is needed to ensure the free flow of goods, services and workers, as well as the business continuity of SMEs. The upcoming initiative on the Single Market Emergency Instrument is an important basis for this work. |
| --- | --- |

5.6.

| 5.7. | The EESC believes that for SMEs with a high degree of information asymmetry between service provider and client and for services where the service provider acts as a custodian of the client (e.g., in the liberal professions), professional regulation can protect the safety, independence and quality of services, while market distortions, including possible cross-border barriers also need to be counteracted. |
| --- | --- |

5.7.

| 5.8. | To enable the uptake of digital and green solutions, proper physical infrastructure at an affordable price is needed at all business sites, including rural and remote areas. While investment in efficient digital connections and sustainable transport and energy systems is useful in any circumstances, it also boosts recovery. |
| --- | --- |

5.8.

6.   Financial and other support

| 6.1. | SMEs’ extra needs in terms of financial and other support mainly stem from their reduced capacity for recovery, digitalisation and greening due to their limited resources. The COVID-19-induced crisis is now deepened by rising inflation, which is also caused by rising energy prices. Therefore, the EESC stresses the importance of providing relevant financial and non-financial support and hopes that the Member States, while taking into account their diverging resources and capabilities to support companies, swiftly approve the proposal to extend the State Aid Temporary Framework (11), acting as a bridge to market-based post-COVID-19 conditions. |
| --- | --- |

6.1.

| 6.2. | In allocating public financial support, care must be taken to avoid picking winners or supporting non-viable businesses, as competition and markets should determine which businesses succeed. Instead, fund allocation should take account of the varying conditions and types of SME and thus make the support more efficient and better targeted to meet the needs in question. |
| --- | --- |

6.2.

| 6.3. | The EESC reiterates its proposal to create and develop a network of ‘financial and funding ombudsmen’ in Member States, coordinated by the EU, and suggests that the scope be extended to cover all sources of funding. The EESC also proposed setting up an SME liquidity task force, which would work in close cooperation with the ombudsmen to monitor the implementation of the new EC measures geared towards the short-term liquidity of micro-SMEs, which have been proposed at EU and Member State level. As well as helping SMEs access funds, the network may also help the EC collect and analyse qualitative data to learn how intermediary banks use financial instruments to reach the SMEs most in need of financial resources and why credit is not granted to them, in line with the principles governing feedback from banks. The network should also settle more overarching disputes between SMEs and banks, other financial service and liquidity providers and other funding bodies. |
| --- | --- |

6.3.

| 6.4. | Investment in innovation is definitely beneficial, as it contributes both to the development of current businesses and to creating new ones and enhancing long-term success. As well as focusing on certain innovation ecosystems, funding for innovation should enhance the development of technologies and solutions that can be scaled up and adopted by a wide variety of SMEs. Turning risky, yet innovative ideas into action requires the engagement of several actors: researchers, entrepreneurs and end-users or clients. However, EU support schemes funded by Horizon Europe and InvestEU are far too complex for some SMEs to apply, even if they would be considered eligible. The EU can overcome this challenge by reducing burdens and obstacles when it comes to the presentation of ideas by SMEs and by providing constant mentoring and support to the successful applicants throughout the whole process. The EESC suggests that the EC and Member States draw up and implement swiftly a one-sheet-application process for SMEs, to ease and accelerate their access to EU funds. |
| --- | --- |

6.4.

| 6.5. | Many Cohesion Policy programmes make use of the newly introduced rules and increased flexibility to restructure their allocations to sectors and regions hit hardest by the pandemic. The EC needs to guarantee that allocations linked to innovation and the twin transition do not decrease, affecting SMEs investments in infrastructure, digital capacity, and environmental resilience. |
| --- | --- |

6.5.

| 6.6. | Enhancing competences and skills is another area for future-oriented investments that should be prioritised. The need for skills development applies to entrepreneurs, enterprise managers and workers alike. Proper vocational skills must be ensured to meet both the current and future needs of SMEs. To be able to meet the needs of the twin transitions, digital and green skills should be considered as basic skills for everyone. Meeting the new skills demand requires both adjusting the vocational education and training and organising upskilling and reskilling. Social dialogue plays an important role in skills development at workplaces, and good VET practices should be promoted and exchanged through relevant EU initiatives in cooperation between SME organisations, the social partners and Member States. |
| --- | --- |

6.6.

| 6.7. | Micro and small enterprises, in particular, need practical grassroots-level support and advice that is intrinsically linked to their resource-related capacity. Much more should be done to ensure the availability and accessibility of sufficient and applicable advisory services for both longer-term and everyday purposes, including the adoption of modern technologies, the development of skills and improved business performance. The EESC also calls for specific campaigns and tools to be developed especially for micro-enterprises, as the biggest and most vulnerable part of SMEs. |
| --- | --- |

6.7.

| 6.8. | To be able to understand the practical needs of SMEs and to target measures in a proper way, a solid data base on the grass-root level conditions is a necessity. It is also important that policymakers at all levels keep connections to the practical life and circumstances of SMEs. The EESC encourages the EC to further strengthen the SME Envoy network towards a more interactive model, where there is a constant, direct and as close and comprehensive as possible link and consistent connection with SMEs and SME representative organisations and support networks, such as the social partners and relevant stakeholders’ organisations. Also, the EESC asks the EC to urgently appoint and launch the work of EU SME envoy, who needs to have an operative, not only a figurative, status in the institutions. The EESC underlines the pivotal role of the SME Envoy network, EEN and SME organisations to publicize all support measures as widely as possible, in order to spread the information to the widest audience of SMEs possible. |
| --- | --- |

6.8.

| 6.9. | Networking, cooperation and partnerships with other businesses and stakeholders are still other ways of increasing the recovery, digitalisation and greening capacity of SMEs. This should be one of the main purposes of enhancing innovation and business ecosystems, and the EESC stresses the need to strengthen the role and the network of Digital Innovation Hubs, and online platforms to be easily accessible and supportive for SMEs. Digitalisation is key in everyday business as well, as it facilitates networking and makes it possible for SMEs to interact more widely and more closely with customers, investors, business partners, social partners, researchers, educators and public authorities. |
| --- | --- |

6.9.

| 6.10. | The EESC has identified the following principles to be considered when developing any new SME digitalisation programmes — and these can also be applied to all SME support measures:






  — | ensure that the programme is targeted, fits the needs and is easier for beneficiaries to understand, apply for and implement — by consulting key stakeholders and experts beforehand; |
| --- | --- | --- |

6.10.

—

ensure that the programme is targeted, fits the needs and is easier for beneficiaries to understand, apply for and implement — by consulting key stakeholders and experts beforehand;

| — | organise a key programme focal point for information and resources that SMEs can access to support their digitalisation activities and help them develop know-how in both how to purchase and how to use these technologies; |
| --- | --- |

—

organise a key programme focal point for information and resources that SMEs can access to support their digitalisation activities and help them develop know-how in both how to purchase and how to use these technologies;

| — | develop entrepreneurs’ own digital skills, as this has a direct correlation with the level of digitalisation of the company, together with elevating the overall level of digital skills in the company; |
| --- | --- |

—

develop entrepreneurs’ own digital skills, as this has a direct correlation with the level of digitalisation of the company, together with elevating the overall level of digital skills in the company;

| — | facilitate access to external finance and ensure fast disbursements; |
| --- | --- |

—

facilitate access to external finance and ensure fast disbursements;

| — | promote collaborations with other partners and stakeholders; |
| --- | --- |

—

promote collaborations with other partners and stakeholders;

| — | the digitisation programmes should be designed to collect data and feedback from SMEs — also intended to improve current and future services and programmes. |
| --- | --- |

—

the digitisation programmes should be designed to collect data and feedback from SMEs — also intended to improve current and future services and programmes.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  OJ C 517, 22.12.2021, p. 45, point 3.6.3.

1

(2)  OJ L 48, 23.2.2011, p. 1.

2

(3)  https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=10117&furtherNews=yes#navItem-1

3

(4)  OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 210.

4

(5)  COM(2020) 103 final.

5

(6)  OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 210.

6

(7)  OJ C 197, 8.6.2018, p. 1.

7

(8)  OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 210 and previous opinions.

8

(9)  OJ L 172, 26.6.2019, p. 18.

9

(10)  OJ C 517, 22.12.2021, p. 45, point 3.6.3.

10

(11)  Made on 30.9.2021 — to extend it by further 6 months.

11

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/14

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘EURES — for a better integration of labour markets’

(own-initiative opinion)

(2022/C 194/03)

Rapporteur:

| Plenary Assembly decision | 20.2.2020 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Rule 32(2) of the Rules of Procedure |
| | Own-initiative opinion |
| Section responsible | Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship |
| Adopted in section | 16.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 237/1/5 |

Plenary Assembly decision

20.2.2020

Legal basis

Rule 32(2) of the Rules of Procedure

Own-initiative opinion

Section responsible

Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship

Adopted in section

16.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

19.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

237/1/5

1.   Recommendations and conclusions

| 1.1. | The EESC encourages initiatives at European and local level that develop a more adaptable and accessible European labour market for all citizens, regardless of nationality, gender, age or social status. The transparency and accessibility of information, counselling and intermediation services in the labour market are key to strengthening and developing the European labour market. The EURES portal, launched in 1994, has rapidly become a familiar tool aimed at providing equal access to quality information, counselling and intermediation, efficient and secure systems for the electronic exchange of data between jobseekers and employers, and improving feedback on processes accompanying job placement in another country between employers, jobseekers and institutions. However, the socioeconomic changes that have taken place in the EU and EEA over these nearly 27 years call for the improvement of these services and for greater clarity and visibility of the real performance of public employment services. This improvement can be made on the basis of an outline of future paths for the further development of or changes to information, advisory and intermediation activities, support for the reduction of imbalances in the European labour market, and also the addressing of abusive and unregulated practices in the area of employment intermediation. The new realities following Brexit, as well as the COVID-19 pandemic, the dynamic socioeconomic environment in the EU and the EEA, and the inclusion of EURES in the activities of the European Labour Authority, also call for an updated reading of the EURES regulatory framework. It is also necessary to take account of the fact that, since its creation, EURES has not been subject to any substantial changes to update its roles and activities in a timely manner. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | The EESC recommends a comprehensive analysis of Regulation (EU) 2016/589 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1). In the context of its activities, we believe that the network has the potential to provide more analytical information and carry out monitoring of processes related to labour mobility. Through its electronic portal, the network could provide consolidated information and advice to jobseekers and employers on a much larger scale than at present. With the incorporation of EURES into the activities of the European Labour Authority (ELA), the activities of the network could be expanded and optimised in order to maximise the output of the human and financial resources invested therein. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | The EESC calls for a public consultation to be launched on the modernisation of the EURES network and portal, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of the services provided, which should be carried out in cooperation with the social partners at both national and European level. This will provide the necessary basis and platform for further development of the network, with the active involvement of all parties involved in the process. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | The EESC believes that a systematic and detailed analysis is needed of the activities of the EURES network, in the light of its inclusion in the general mechanism of action of the ELA. Being part of the ELA enhances the potential and opportunities of the network to further develop its activities in combatting malpractice in the labour market and to facilitate and better inform users about labour mobility and related challenges. The EURES network provides a good-quality channel for systematised information and can play a more active role in preventing, monitoring and controlling the risk of abuse of labour rights in connection with cross-border mobility. The development of publicly accessible systems to monitor processes associated with COVID-19 that affect the dynamics of the European labour market, as well as processes reflecting unregulated practices by intermediaries and labour market actors and casting light on them, would have significant added value for the activities of the EURES network. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | The EESC draws particular attention to the rapidly changing labour market situation in Europe, triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. Member States need to follow the algorithms designed to tackle the evolving social crisis and also develop innovative approaches to address challenges. The EURES platform should be ready to react immediately with concrete measures in the face of a pandemic or in the event of restrictions and new challenges to the free movement of the workforce. In this context, measures should also be developed to improve the integration of social groups furthest from the labour market, such as people with disabilities, people of pre-retirement age and young people, including through improved dialogue and cooperation between the various institutions concerned and the social partners. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | In a pandemic situation, one of the most affected segments of the labour market are seasonal workers. An important element in the informed decision to enter employment in a country other than one’s own is the provision of detailed information to jobseekers by the potential employer on all measures for dealing with complications to seasonal cross-border employment due to COVID-19. The EESC also feels it would be useful to perform a qualitative review of the organisation and template of the published notices, so that quality is prioritised over the amount of information published. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | The EESC recommends the use of the European job mobility portal (EURES) also as a conduit for initiatives related to educational mobility and the upskilling of different groups in the labour market. We believe that such a model would be profitable and feasible using the resources and quality of EURES, within the framework of the ELA. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

2.   Specific comments

| 2.1. | The EESC values the European job mobility portal EURES as a vital tool in the process of transforming the European labour market, as well as recognising the essential role of public employment services in its implementation. The EESC believes that EURES can play a much greater role in informing and advising the workforce on how best to respond to the current challenges posed by digitalisation, the transition to green jobs, the ongoing pandemic and in light of the new policies and forms of employment. The EESC welcomes the establishment of the ELA and its role as a coordination mechanism in the field of cross-border labour mobility for facilitating joint checks, and as a mediator to find solutions in the event of a cross-border dispute between national authorities. In this sense, the EESC believes that EURES, as part of the ELA, must continue and accelerate its transformation so as to actively adapt its operations to the new challenges arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, which have an effect on the overall development of the European labour market. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | A measured and timely balancing of priority policies is essential for the EU’s economic and social health. The human factor and people’s well-being and development is the shared mission of the European community. This new reality requires an urgent rethinking of all available resources and, where necessary, transformation of activities related to the EURES network in a way that is appropriate to the new market and social conditions. At this juncture, the EESC believes that special emphasis should also be placed on vulnerable groups in the labour market — people with disabilities, young people and an ageing population — and that particular attention should be paid to certain forms of employment, such as seasonal workers (2), to ensure equal treatment for those employees, particularly in the context of a pandemic. The challenges faced by employers when using the network are not insignificant. The EESC therefore calls for the launch of an evaluation of the services provided and an analysis of the results, together with the social partners at local and European level. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.2.1. | Seasonal workers. At present, seasonal labour mobility from one MS to another, in addition to carrying an additional risk to workers’ health due to the pandemic, entails a reduced ability to ensure their safety due to their lack of knowledge and awareness of the host country’s labour law. The EURES network, which focuses on jobseekers, needs to rethink its way of working and ensure the highest possible level of awareness of guarantees regarding the rights, working conditions and status of this group of workers in a pandemic. Any worker who chooses to work in a country other than their own and who makes this choice using the network must be informed in advance by the EURES teams, in a comprehensible manner, of the precise terms and conditions, as well as the specific health measures, that will be guaranteed to them and their family when entering employment in another MS. Liability for failure to comply with the proposed sanitary and health conditions must also be defined in a unambiguous manner. The EESC therefore considers it urgent to assess whether Regulation (EU) 2016/589 is capable of responding to the current challenges and specific needs of the European labour market, and whether it should be revised. Seasonal workers, given the nature of their employment, are among the most vulnerable cross-border workers and the protection of their rights should be reviewed both in a situation of constraints due to epidemic measures, natural disasters or other force majeure circumstances and, in general, after the normalisation of public and economic life. EURES should, through its advisers in the Member States, provide daily updates on measures taken in each MS that concern the rights and obligations of the workforce in a pandemic situation, including treatment options and conditions when health problems occur. Publications on the e-portal (3) relating to the rights of seasonal workers are a good basis for building on this type of information. It is necessary to develop safeguards for this group of workers, which should be subject to publicly available monitoring. The EESC recommends that services aimed at seasonal workers be considered and made subject to the requirements of Directive 2014/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (4), as well as the Communication from the Commission on Guidelines on seasonal workers in the EU in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak (5). |
| --- | --- |

2.2.1.

| 2.2.2. | People with disabilities. The EESC recommends adapting the network to the specific needs of people with disabilities, who are currently excluded from the scope of the portal, creating inequalities between vulnerable groups in the labour market. The EESC recommends, first of all, building into the portal a functionality that allows its use by people with different disabilities. Next, a separate section is needed for jobs that are suitable for people with disabilities, as well as an accessible environment to easily reach and obtain information about these jobs. The EESC believes that, in our efforts to create a common and socially committed European home, it is necessary to focus more attention and resources on this segment, and calls for structured information on the number of people with disabilities who benefit from the services of the portal. At the same time, we also lack systematic information on European-wide initiatives initiated by EURES, and this gap should be addressed in a timely and adequate manner. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.2.

| 2.2.3. | Youth. Offering initiatives to support young people looking for apprenticeships and traineeships is a step towards improving the working climate. The EURES network already participates in European youth projects and, by objectively examining the results of their implementation and using an integrated approach, could contribute to improving awareness of dangers in the process of recruiting young people for traineeship positions and the resolution or prevention of those dangers. More and more young people are exercising their right to labour mobility in another Member State to start their work experience. Unfortunately, there are also many unregulated and harmful practices used in this type of employment, arising mainly from differences in Member State standards and varying applicable legislation. So far, the only initiative targeting young people aged 18-35 was Your First EURES Job (YfEj (6)). The EESC calls for this initiative to be evaluated and an assessment made of its effectiveness and efficiency, and for the portal to provide structured information by MS on the rights and obligations of trainees/apprentices, as well as on the applicable legislation. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.3.

| 2.2.4. | Persons of pre-retirement age. The EESC welcomes the fact that life expectancy in Europe is increasing, but is very concerned about the effects of Europe’s ageing population on the labour market. To make full use of older people’s potential for as long as possible through the possibilities of EURES, it would be advisable to develop pan-European programmes to promote the retention of older people in employment, similar to Senior Expert Services in Germany (SES (7)). The share of older people in the labour market is steadily increasing, requiring specific measures and incentives. The demographic challenges (8) facing the European labour market require new approaches and measures that are coordinated and monitored in terms of the results achieved. In this context, EURES possesses excellent technical and human resources which could be used more actively and specifically for the purpose of initiatives related to supporting employment in the context of an ageing population. The initiative currently proposed by the network is Reactivate (9), and the EESC recommends that this initiative should also be evaluated and an assessment made of its effectiveness and efficiency. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.4.

| 2.2.5. | Employers. The EESC believes that the EURES network should provide accessible and understandable information to employers who use the network, and the portal should focus not only on cross-border mobility, but also promote mobility within Member States. To put all employers on an equal footing, clear guidance should be given to address administrative obstacles when hiring from other Member States, as found by the 2019 evaluation report of the network — Study supporting the ex-post EURES evaluation and the second biennial EURES report (10). In a context of the labour shortages encountered in all Member States, particularly of qualified workers, the EURES network should also provide up-to-date information on national labour shortages and surpluses in each MS, and also encourage coordination of MS actions for an equal distribution of jobseekers in order to strengthen the pan-European labour market. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.5.

| 2.3. | At the same time, the EESC is aware that upskilling and transferable skills are essential for strengthening the workforce’s abilities and creating good quality and sustainable jobs. To really improve jobseekers’ employability, the EESC proposes that the functionalities of the EURES portal be expanded to provide relevant information on educational mobility opportunities detailing training opportunities in other MS provided by private and public organisations and institutions, including other EC portals/networks, such as SALTO (11). Such information is currently not available gathered in one place. It would be possible to complement the portal’s information in this respect by stepping up cooperation with training and education organisations and institutions. In this way, the network’s electronic portal can become a solid platform for offering uniform solutions in relation to training, employment and the protection of jobseekers’ and employers’ interests. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | The EESC believes that the limited role of the EURES portal as an ‘intermediary platform’ for job searches and placement, even more so after the ELA was commissioned with its administration, should be reassessed and expanded. The functions of EURES advisers in individual Member States, which currently include the provision of information, guidance and recruitment for both jobseekers and employers, should be upgraded and complemented with functions for issuing alerts in connection with breaches of labour law, and facilitated contact with labour inspectorates and other control bodies. This would require much better cooperation between public employment services and labour inspectorates at national level, as well as liaison with the platform for declared employment. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

| 2.5. | The EESC also calls for the development of sustainable rules for the work of the EURES network on the monitoring of published notices, as well as on the organisation of job fairs in different Member States. There is a need to establish common rules and mechanisms in each MS for primary control, verification of risky employers and temporary exclusion of their access to the portal. An appropriate system should be developed for protecting the rights of cross-border workers through the relevant networks and organisations for social cooperation. |
| --- | --- |

2.5.

| 2.6. | EURES must play a more active role in preventing imbalances in national labour markets. The network should provide information and take into account specific shortages and oversupply of labour, in certain periods preventing the large-scale attraction of workers in short supply, especially those in highly skilled occupations, which are extremely important for the national economy. For many Member States, the brain drain to countries with higher living standards already poses a threat to their own ecosystems. The EESC recommends that the network collect and analyse information on workers in short supply by country, and create a clear algorithm for organising and participating in activities related to the recruitment of such workers. In order to improve the visibility of the network’s activities and ensure that it is kept up-to-date, it is necessary to re-examine what vacancies are published on the EURES e-portal (12) by the national advisers. At present, millions of notices from national employment services’ databases are currently visible on the portal, but due to requirements a large proportion of these are not applicable for all European citizens. This creates a feeling of scale, but on the other hand the effectiveness of such an approach and its final outcome must be analysed. The EESC reiterates the need to seek a balanced approach to recruitment and labour supply that takes into account labour shortages and surpluses in individual MS. |
| --- | --- |

2.6.

| 2.7. | The EESC calls for a uniform approach in the work of EURES advisers across the Member States through the exchange of good practices and the development of uniform guidelines. Feedback between the various actors involved in the consultation and intermediation process should be improved. In some MS, there is no regulatory framework requiring feedback and reporting on actual employment following a placement under the EURES network. We recommend tasking the European Coordination Office, as the umbrella unit, with collecting and analysing this type of information by Member State. On this basis, it will be possible to take timely and adequate decisions to improve network functionalities or build on its functionalities. The EESC is of the opinion that feedback between employers, workers and public employment services (PES) is key to evaluating the effectiveness of EURES. |
| --- | --- |

2.7.

| 2.8. | The EESC also draws attention to the fact that the withdrawal of one of the main players in the European labour market, namely the United Kingdom, requires further flexibility and calibration of processes relating to the processing, protection and transfer of personal data and labour rights, and work with intermediary agencies at local level and throughout the EU. The timely reaction and adaptation of the network to the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU is key for the security of processes that accompany intermediary activities, and also for the quality and safe processing of EU citizens’ personal data. It is necessary to ensure that European citizens whose personal data have been transferred through the network and are already held by intermediary organisations on the territory of a third country are kept adequately informed and that any problems are addressed. These processes directly concern the functioning of the EURES network and need to be reflected properly and in a timely manner in the legal basis, including, if shown to be necessary, through a revision of Regulation (EU) 2016/589 and its implementing decisions. |
| --- | --- |

2.8.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  Regulation (EU) 2016/589 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 April 2016 on a European network of employment services (EURES), workers' access to mobility services and the further integration of labour markets, and amending Regulations (EU) No 492/2011 and (EU) No 1296/2013 (OJ L 107, 22.4.2016, p. 1).

1

(2)  In their analysis of 28 April 2021, published on the Migration Data Portal, International Organization for Migration (IOM) experts Lea von Martius and Dr Martina Manke stated: ‘The lack of political prioritisation of seasonal workers’ concerns is certainly to blame. This is compounded by the dearth of comprehensive, meaningful data on the issue: significant underestimates of these workers and patchy data on the impact of COVID-19 on their movements, working conditions and health undermine workers’ rights, and threaten their and the public’s health and ultimately food security. The numbers that do exist do not give us a representative picture of the sector and the role of migrants within it. This creates serious gaps in the information needed to design effective policies and monitor the impact of COVID-19 related policies on seasonal migrant workers.’

2

(3)  https://ec.europa.eu/eures/public/seasonal-worker-guide-your-rights-2021-09-30_en

3

(4)  Directive 2014/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the conditions of entry and stay of third-country nationals for the purpose of employment as seasonal workers (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 375).

4

(5)  OJ C 235 I, 17.7.2020, p. 1.

5

(6)  https://www.yourfirsteuresjob.eu/en/home

6

(7)  https://www.ses-bonn.de/en/about-us

7

(8)  According to Eurostat, the old-age dependency ratio (people aged 65 and over as a share of the working age population 16-65) in the EU will shift from 27,8 % in 2013 to 39,5 % in 2030, and may reach 47,6 % and 43,6 % for Denmark and Latvia respectively.

8

(9)  https://www.reactivatejob.eu/en/home

9

(10)  https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=738&langId=en&pubId=8370&furtherPubs=yes

10

(11)  https://www.salto-youth.net/

11

(12)  https://ec.europa.eu/eures/public/index_en

12

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/19

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Towards a new care model for older people: learning from COVID-19’

(own-initiative opinion)

(2022/C 194/04)

| Rapporteur: | Miguel Ángel CABRA DE LUNA |
| --- | --- |

Rapporteur:

Miguel Ángel CABRA DE LUNA

| Referral | 25.3.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Rule 32(2) of the Rules of Procedure |
| | Own-initiative opinion |
| Section responsible | Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship |
| Adopted in section | 16.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 241/3/3 |

Referral

25.3.2021

Legal basis

Rule 32(2) of the Rules of Procedure

Own-initiative opinion

Section responsible

Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship

Adopted in section

16.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

19.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

241/3/3

1.   Objectives and scope of the opinion: care for older people, particularly those who are dependent

| 1.1. | This own-initiative opinion focuses on: analysing the various models of long-term care for people over the age of 65 who have lost their autonomy or are dependent, particularly in institutional care homes; assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the various care models — institutionalised care, home care and other forms of care provision — in the Member States; drawing conclusions in this regard and calling for action that is consistent with the shortcomings identified and coordinated in both European and national policies. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | Longer life expectancy poses both challenges and opportunities in the area of demographic, social, economic and housing needs and of respect for fundamental rights, which go beyond care for older people. This is also linked to other issues relating to dignified, autonomous, active and healthy ageing. However, this more multifaceted approach will have to be developed in more detail in other EESC opinions. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

2.   Conclusions and recommendations

Care models

| 2.1. | The EESC believes that more attention should be devoted to care for dependent older people with long-term care needs (1), and that this should be mainstreamed into EU policymaking in view of the demographic transition. This is particularly important given that by 2050 — according to pre-pandemic data — more than a quarter of the population will be over 65, and the number of people over 80 will double. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | The EESC proposes setting up a European Observatory for care for older people, which would, for instance, make it possible to collect sufficient statistical data, compare good practices between different state models, identify structural weaknesses in national systems in terms of capacity to meet the demand for assistance and funding, provide technical support to facilitate the adoption of EU political guidelines aimed at developing the third report on care for older people, implementing the European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan and contributing to the development of the EU strategy on long-term care, including for older people. This will be guided by a greater effort to help and motivate older people to remain active, independent and in good physical and mental health for as long as possible. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | The EESC deems it essential to establish a strategic framework, for the purpose of medium-term forecasting with a holistic approach, in order to respond to the challenges of caring for older people in the EU, by laying the foundations for a long-living, healthy society and an intergenerational solidarity pact in the EU. The pandemic has revealed failures in forecasting, coordination and planning in areas affecting essential community services (such as healthcare and social services) and biomedical research policies. These failures must be addressed quickly. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | The EESC therefore welcomes the Commission’s initiative to establish a new European Care Strategy. It calls for it to be implemented as soon as possible and to involve the European consultative institutions and European social dialogue at the various levels, taking into account agreements approved by the parties. Civil dialogue may also take place with European civil society organisations representing older people (AGE Platform Europe and its various members, among others), without excluding the development of a specific European strategy for older people in the EU over the coming years. Similarly, the EESC proposes to include care for older people among the strategic aspects of the debate at the Conference on the Future of Europe given the importance of the demographic issue. At the same time, it supports prioritising integration of a ‘Europe of health’, including long-term care for older people. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

| 2.5. | We also propose that an ad hoc group be set up within the EESC before the end of the current term, to implement various initiatives relating to care for older people, ageing and the challenge of people living longer, in step with the EP Intergroup on Demographic Challenges and, among other initiatives, the United Nations World Assembly on Ageing scheduled for 2022. |
| --- | --- |

2.5.

| 2.6. | The EESC urges the European Commission and the Member States to develop in the short term the principles relating to care for older people within the European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan. |
| --- | --- |

2.6.

| 2.7. | The EESC believes that long-term care should be included in the ‘stress tests’ provided for in the EU regulation on serious cross-border threats. |
| --- | --- |

2.7.

| 2.8. | The pandemic has helped to highlight conceptual, structural and functional shortcomings in care models for older people, whether care is provided through care homes, home care services, family or professional carers. |
| --- | --- |

2.8.

| 2.9. | We believe the Member States need to establish or update existing laws on supporting and protecting older people’s autonomy, in accordance with Article 12 of the convention on the dignity and human rights of persons with disabilities, which has been ratified by the 27 Member States and the EU. They also need to develop areas within social protection systems to deal with prevention, loss of autonomy and the self-determination of older people. With a view to ensuring social protection for all and other social rights, such as unemployment insurance, family protection, access to housing and care for dependent persons, the EESC believes that older people’s autonomy must be ensured on an equal footing and be recognised as a subjective right for all citizens, as part of the development of the pillars of the welfare state. |
| --- | --- |

2.9.

| 2.10. | COVID-19 has revealed the insufficient supply — and, particularly, the accessibility problems — of high-quality long-term care for all older people at prices that are affordable for a large number of Europeans and their families. In this regard, the EESC considers that devoting attention to and identifying the number of older people who need care but cannot access it for various reasons is a priority. |
| --- | --- |

2.10.

| 2.11. | To promote and provide a framework for such national regulations and policies, the EESC suggests that the Commission draw up proposals on anticipation, prevention and the loss of autonomy of older people to include them in the healthcare strategy and the forthcoming guidelines on independent living for older people under the European Disability Strategy. |
| --- | --- |

2.11.

| 2.12. | During the pandemic, older people were only partially taken into account, were undervalued and even suffered discrimination. Care for older people is not the problem, the lack of it is. |
| --- | --- |

2.12.

| 2.13. | The EESC proposes that the EU establish, as requested in previous EESC opinions, as well as in the EP report on an old continent growing older, a standard definition to better define the concepts of dependence and the need to provide care for others as they lose their autonomy, taking into account the variety of approaches taken by the various countries and their freedom to choose how to design their social protection systems. Age is not an identity, not all older people are dependent or have imperative external care needs, and dependency resulting from a disability is not the same as the loss of autonomy caused by dysfunctions that may arise as a result of growing older. However, in a significant proportion of cases, the two circumstances coincide. |
| --- | --- |

2.13.

| 2.14. | The EESC requests that, as recognition of the fundamental rights of older people and as an expression of their contributions to society, as laid down in Article 25 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the European Commission organise a European Year of Older People. |
| --- | --- |

2.14.

| 2.15. | In a number of EU countries, complaints or lawsuits have been brought before the courts relating to the treatment received in care homes or possible cases of violence or violation of older people’s fundamental rights. The EESC therefore calls for the principles of the European and UN Treaties that have been ratified by the EU and the Member States to be enforced in order to guarantee the fundamental rights and dignity of older people, and for measures to help older people take decisions to be put in place, with legal protection measures — both judicial and extrajudicial — provided in care services for dependent older people. Consideration could also be given to creating the position of legal administrator or mediator or a corresponding function (depending of the legal system of the country concerned), determined to act in empathy and to the best interest of the dependents, which could have positive effects according to analyses in some countries. In this context, the EESC proposes, in line with the UN proposals, support for the adoption of a Convention on the dignity and rights of older people. |
| --- | --- |

2.15.

Structures

| 2.16. | Responding to the call to generally deinstitutionalise care for older people in care homes involves promoting dependent older people’s autonomy, independence, ability to look after themselves and social relations. This means providing them with local social and health resources, much more structured and efficient home support, as well as new housing alternatives, such as sheltered, supervised or community-based housing, cohabitation units or other alternatives that exist in various EU countries, according to the needs and preferences of the older people losing their autonomy. For more dependent persons, traditional care homes need to be redeveloped to make it seem more like living at home. Shortcomings in care systems exposed by the pandemic need to be addressed through the EU Structural and Cohesion Funds, the Recovery and Resilience Facility and the EU health programme (EU4Health) by means of recommendations on funding integrated into the European Semester. |
| --- | --- |

2.16.

| 2.16.1. | To that end, the EESC calls for the Member States to use the EU Structural Funds and Recovery Fund to provide funding to adapt housing, create cohabitation units, redevelop the various types of care home and invest in labour and services. Such adaptations need to be carried out in compliance with the highest accessibility requirements, as regards both the built environment and the accompanying digital ecosystem. |
| --- | --- |

2.16.1.

| 2.17. | The EESC believes that, as a person-centred sector, the social economy (cooperatives, mutual societies, associations and foundations) should be considered and supported as a key player and a driver of innovation and the transition towards this new model, in line with the EU Action Plan for the Social Economy. |
| --- | --- |

2.17.

Resources

| 2.18. | The main shortcoming here, which is the root of many others, is insufficient funding. This factor varies substantially between Member States, ranging from 0,3 % to 3,7 % of GDP. This is undoubtedly linked to the individual care models themselves, but also to the impact of policies resulting from the recent crises, which significantly affected funding. |
| --- | --- |

2.18.

| 2.19. | The EESC believes that, bearing in mind the consequences of the debt crisis, the rules that contributed to this situation must be revisited and that sufficient public funding must be ensured within social security systems in line with existing demand and while ensuring high-quality services. |
| --- | --- |

2.19.

| 2.20. | The EESC thinks — and the experience of several Member States bears this out — that the various care packages for older people need to be properly regulated, with public procurement systems in which the decisive factor is quality of service rather than price. |
| --- | --- |

2.20.

| 2.20.1. | The EESC therefore recommends that in those Member States where it is applicable, taking into account the mechanisms and procedures specific to each Member State, both the allocation of places at state-assisted care homes and the renewal of these public contracts be conditional on complying with staff ratio requirements, providing workers with ongoing training, ensuring suitable working conditions and meeting tax obligations. |
| --- | --- |

2.20.1.

| 2.20.2. | Similarly, public-private partnerships and private services — as well as public services — must be subject to clear and effective evaluation, supervisory and inspection mechanisms, both as a requirement linked to the public resources allocated to private or state-assisted care homes, and as a public responsibility to protect the rights of older people. |
| --- | --- |

2.20.2.

| 2.21. | The EESC considers that a well-structured debate at various levels and between various actors is needed to address funding care for older people to which all have access. The discussion should include not just expenditure but also investment. To this end, consideration should be given to the way in which the various Member States operate, the funding models and the various possibilities for sourcing funding, whether through public, state-assisted or complementary funding. This analysis should include positive externalities in terms of savings which may be the result of, among other things, deploying new technologies, investments in active and healthy ageing policies or health promotion and disease prevention, always prioritising the objective of quality of life. |
| --- | --- |

2.21.

| 2.22. | The EESC proposes that measures be put in place to ensure adequate training for carers, with specialised, institutionalised training pathways being developed for care staff, and that an official certificate for basic skills be required in order to be able to work in social care services for older people. It also recommends using systems for recognising such qualifications between countries and that the European Social Fund earmark funding for the training of carers for older people. |
| --- | --- |

2.22.

| 2.23. | The EESC believes that the issue of EU care workers and all related aspects, including the right to collective bargaining, should be incorporated into European social dialogue, as has already begun to happen with the European social partners’ autonomous framework agreement on active ageing and an inter-generational approach (2017). Social dialogue should take place also in the inter-confederal, federal and sectoral spheres (personal care and social services sector). |
| --- | --- |

2.23.

| 2.24. | In line with the Council’s request (COM(2013) 152 final), the EESC agrees that the Member States should ratify the ILO Home Work Convention, 1996 (No 177), the ILO Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No 189) and Recommendation 201, which supplements Convention 189. |
| --- | --- |

2.24.

| 2.25. | Technological changes, in turn, can provide essential support for care for older people, although this can never replace human labour. Examples include telemedicine or telerehabilitation, training of professionals, the maintenance of social relations through video calls, etc. Other examples include the use of bed or body-worn sensors to detect vital signs or prevent falls, or of infrastructure and architecture, such as home automation, to create friendly environments or mobility solutions for older people. |
| --- | --- |

2.25.

| 2.25.1. | The EESC therefore thinks that all stakeholders involved in caring for older people should make better use of innovations arising from digital technologies; incentives for this could be provided by Structural Funds programmes. The EESC also proposes that consideration be given to training older people needing long-term care in the use of digital technologies. |
| --- | --- |

2.25.1.

| 2.26. | Moreover, contrary to what is sometimes argued, protecting older people with care needs is not incompatible with taking care of young people. The EESC believes that this false reasoning needs to be rejected. Just as the green and digital transitions must go hand in hand with the social transition, demographic challenges and opportunities must be based on an intergenerational pact with fundamental objectives of access to quality education for all, to regulated employment with decent jobs and to extensive social protection systems covering all members of society. This applies particularly in societies such as those in Europe, where the social pact is based on intergenerational solidarity. This is why the intergenerational cooperation pact is a basic foundation for the renewal of the European social compact. Neither the current transformation of society nor recovery after the pandemic will be possible without a bond between the generations. |
| --- | --- |

2.26.

| 2.27. | The EESC believes that a wide range of strategies need to be developed for policies and measures directed towards support and care for older people in order to: a) identify in advance weaknesses likely to cause future loss of autonomy and focus on anticipation, prevention, rehabilitation and funding to combat the process that leads to loss of autonomy and dependency; b) delay the onset of dependency through healthy behaviour in relation to diet, physical exercise and working conditions; c) anticipate the impact of disruptive events (unemployment, separations, changes in job, the transition from work to retirement) and loneliness on health; d) identify the most vulnerable people and deal with specific situations (neurodegenerative diseases, depression and suicide risk, cancers, etc.); e) sufficiently and permanently fund collective responsibility for the care of older people; and f) assist and support family carers with instruments, training, measures to balance work with caring, taking into account the fact that acting as carers can lead them to lose their own autonomy and their entitlement to protection when they are older. |
| --- | --- |

2.27.

3.   Background and context

Developments

| 3.1. | Discussions on the care needs of dependent older people have been taking place in the EU for decades. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

| 3.2. | A number of aspects have contributed to changes in the initial design of long-term care. It has been moving from a purely care-based approach to a more integrated, person-centred and high-quality approach, combining health and social care, and with service provision for all, which, in the view of the Council and the European Commission, should meet three key criteria: access for all, irrespective of income or assets; quality care; and sufficient funding for health and social care systems. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.

| 3.3. | Sociological changes have helped to reinforce this trend, such as the ageing of the population itself, the percentage of older people who are dependent or losing autonomy, a rise in mental illnesses in the upper sections of the population pyramid, the massive increase in the number of women in paid work, the rise in the number of people living alone and changes to family models. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.

| 3.4. | The impact of these changes called into question both the care-based nature of social services and the central role of the family — mainly women — in such care, creating the need to develop — alongside pensions, education, healthcare and dependency — a new pillar of the welfare state, which refers to social services. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.

| 3.5. | Nevertheless, particularly since the debt crisis and the adoption of austerity policies, which, among other things, resulted in budget cuts in healthcare and social services to varying degrees in the EU Member States, different trends have been observed in different Member States, including a shift back towards a more care-based approach and towards increasing prioritisation of the most severe levels of dependency or of people with limited economic resources, a curbing of the trend towards non-family care as the basis for the system, and the further commodification of the provision of care, with or without public funding. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.

| 3.6. | This can all be observed to varying degrees in the various Member States and comes against the backdrop of greater budgetary pressure on old-age pension systems, a sharp increase in the demand for long-term care, rising unemployment in some Member States, less stable forms of work and discontinuous career paths, and the prioritisation of the over-50s in company staff reduction plans. Without the support of decisive public policies, this situation threatens to lead to lower pensions than current levels and greater inequalities in access to care. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.

| 3.7. | Another key aspect is ascertaining whether care and support should be provided and cohabitation take place at home or in care homes. According to many surveys, the majority of those affected would prefer to stay at home in their community environment. |
| --- | --- |

3.7.

| 3.8. | This preference also meets a structural demand, which also has an economic basis, to increase the active population: in the EU, 25 % of women say that they cannot work or are forced to work part time due to care duties, including care for older people, compared to 3 % of men. As families are smaller and a single salary is often not enough to meet household expenses — except in single-person households — it is becoming increasingly unsustainable for families to take on care duties. To ensure that access to care is not limited to higher-income groups, funding will have to be increased. |
| --- | --- |

3.8.

| 3.9. | Therefore, the positive effects — in social and economic terms — of an inclusive, high-quality and compassionate care system must be highlighted, starting with the fact that funding care services must be seen as an investment with great, multifaceted returns. It reduces the negative externalities of insufficient or inaccessible care in terms of healthcare and social spending. The social dimension is better in terms of support for families, work-life balance, care for other family members, emotional support, the performance of solidarity-based activities and historical memory. In economic terms, it facilitates the creation of millions of jobs, the financing of a large percentage of low-income households, an increase in tax revenues, consumption, the handing down of savings to descendants, production support and productive entrepreneurship. Moreover, home care is generally not only much more comprehensive and individualised, but also cheaper than care in residential settings, except in certain cases, such as people with a high loss of autonomy who are staying in care homes. |
| --- | --- |

3.9.

| 3.10. | Care staff are an essential pillar of institutional care home systems and forms of care at home. In some cases, there is a shortage of such staff and they have precarious contracts, lack the necessary training support, have little professional recognition and are underpaid or irregular workers (in some countries in significant proportions). For this reason, among other things, it is essential to include training programmes for the care of older people, including dependent persons, in the various stages of vocational training, opening the door to dual modes of study. |
| --- | --- |

3.10.

Effects of the pandemic and lessons learned

| 3.11. | Largely through the damage it has caused, the pandemic has helped to further highlight that population ageing is a key strategic challenge for the EU and its Member States. It has highlighted the care requirements of older people because of their loss of autonomy and dependency. Indeed, according to the 2021 Long-term care report drafted by the European Commission and the Social Protection Committee, in 30 years’ time, there will be 130,1 million people over the age of 65, 41 % more than the current figure. As disability situations and long-term care and support needs increase with age along with healthy life years, the number of people who may need long-term care in the EU-27 is expected to rise from 30,8 million in 2019 to 33,7 million in 2030 and 38,1 million in 2050. |
| --- | --- |

3.11.

| 3.12. | Several things have contributed to this greater collective awareness of the challenges associated with increasing life expectancy. There has been higher relative mortality caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in older people and, among them, the most vulnerable living in residential homes. Prejudices and stereotypes relating to older people, discriminatory decisions in health screenings and implicit or explicit questioning of the value and contribution of this group to society have been observed during the pandemic. |
| --- | --- |

3.12.

| 3.12.1. | Similarly, a distorted account of alleged opposition between the interests of young people and those of ‘old’ people has characterised the public debate. There has been evidence of conceptual, structural and operational failures in care models for older people. There has been a growing desire to focus more on access to and affordability of quality care, to respect older people’s dignity and rights, to maintain as much as possible their living autonomy and social environments, to ensure coordination between social and health services, and to secure their financing (public expenditure represented on average 1,7 % of European GDP and is expected to double by 2050 if there is upward convergence between Member States). |
| --- | --- |

3.12.1.

| 3.12.2. | Shortcomings have also been highlighted in a key pillar of long-term care and carers and workers in the sector, which employs 6,4 million people and is expected to create a further 7 million jobs by 2030. Finally, the contribution of informal long-term carers (and gender bias across the whole sector) and the need to extend certain reconciliation or protection measures for this group have been highlighted, which had not been done previously. The time has come to act. |
| --- | --- |

3.12.2.

| 3.13. | The greater focus on demographic challenges and opportunities and, as far as the content of this opinion is concerned, care for older people owing to loss of autonomy or dependence, has helped the European institutions draft important documents on these challenges, as well as on the subject discussed in this opinion. |
| --- | --- |

3.13.

| 3.14. | These include the European Commission’s Green Paper on Ageing, the European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan, the European Parliament resolution on ageing in an old continent, the European Council Report and Conclusions on Mainstreaming Ageing in Public Policies, the European Commission and Social Protection Committee Report on Trends, challenges and opportunities in an ageing society, the Committee of the Regions Working Document on a Future plan for care workers and care services — local and regional opportunities in the context of a European challenge, and, in particular, the proposal made by the Commission President, Ursula Von der Leyen, during her State of the Union speech in the European Parliament, to draw up a new European Care Strategy. |
| --- | --- |

3.14.

| 3.15. | The crisis has highlighted the need for greater familiarity with this issue throughout the EU. We note the lack of statistical data on older people, the need for greater public knowledge of social protection and care models, which differ greatly in the Member States, the desirability of collecting and disseminating good practices among the various Member States, and the need to investigate and prevent discrimination and violence against dependent older people. In short, there is a need for detailed, ongoing monitoring of this matter. |
| --- | --- |

3.15.

| 3.15.1. | In this regard, it should be noted that this opinion’s stated aim of analysing and comparing the situation in the various countries is backed up by a number of studies and reports, including that of the European Commission and the Social Protection Committee, published just before this opinion was drawn up. |
| --- | --- |

3.15.1.

| 3.15.2. | These studies and reports, as well as demonstrating the diversity of care models and situations in the various Member States, show the corresponding lessons that can be learned. These include the following: i) the preference for care at home or in a home-like environment; ii) the need for better coordination between social and healthcare services; iii) the essential role played by care staff and the need for all aspects of their role to be acknowledged, including the emergence of undeclared work; iv) the fact that the demand for care is not being met; v) the urgent need to address the requirement for sufficient, affordable and sustainable funding; vi) the obligation to counteract partial approaches that disregard the recognition and dignity of older people; vii) the need for informal carers to be more visible and better acknowledged, protected and supported; viii) the inadequacy of statistical and sociological data on older people; ix) the obligation to analyse call-out care and home care; x) the interaction between the various aspects affecting care for older people; xi) the significant gender dimension that exists in this sector; xii) the need to establish action plans, assessment systems and regulatory measures regarding care models. |
| --- | --- |

3.15.2.

| 3.16. | The pandemic has helped to highlight shortcomings in care models for older people, whether care is provided by care homes, home care services, family or private carers. |
| --- | --- |

3.16.

| 3.17. | These shortcomings are reflected in whether or not care is provided to all, in the diversity and fragmented nature of the services on offer, in poorly regulated services, in difficulties in coordinating management levels, in coordination problems between social and healthcare services, in the growing commodification of services and in the need for prevention policies and measures. In structural terms, these shortcomings may depend on the proportion of older people, particularly those who are most dependent, living in care homes rather than in person-centred situations. In functional terms, they are largely revealed in limited funding, a shortage of protective equipment, or insufficient staff, job insecurity, occupational risks (including mental health) or lack of training or professional and occupational recognition for staff. |
| --- | --- |

3.17.

| 3.18. | COVID-19 has revealed that there is an insufficient supply of long-term care for all older people at prices that are affordable for a large number of Europeans. In fact, in the EU-27, of those aged 65 and over who had severe difficulties in performing personal care tasks, only a third used home care services in 2014. Member States’ social protection models should also be adapted to meet these new needs with available, accessible, sustainable, affordable and good-quality public or subsidised services. Member States’ social protection models should also be adapted to meet these new needs with available, accessible, sustainable, affordable and good-quality public or subsidised services. |
| --- | --- |

3.18.

| 3.19. | The institutionalisation of care for older people in care homes was already widely questioned before the pandemic but, subsequently, this practice has been more broadly rejected, except in the case of some older people who are not autonomous or are severely dependent. Its shortcomings include: increased risk of infection; residents’ loss of control over their own lives; the rigidity of daily schedules; overcrowding and a wide variety of profiles among residents; little privacy (normally two people per room); the lack of involvement of residents or their family members in monitoring how homes are run; the weakening of family and social relationships; a feeling of dislocation and being uprooted from their community environments. There is also a great need to strengthen the rights and voice of older people in these homes with forms of safeguarding that respect their dignity and their specific situation, especially when it comes to older people with cognitive and mental problems. |
| --- | --- |

3.19.

| 3.20. | Attention should also be drawn to the issues affecting older people who are cared for in their own homes, such as a lack of continuity in home-help services, isolation at home and difficulties accessing basic services. |
| --- | --- |

3.20.

| 3.21. | During the pandemic, in general, older people were stereotyped and even suffered discrimination, even though ageing should be seen as an opportunity rather than a problem. In a number of countries, complaints or lawsuits have been brought before the courts relating to the treatment received in care homes or possible violations of fundamental rights. This has highlighted the need to establish permanent mechanisms to safeguard the well-being and rights of older people, and to combat discrimination against this group. |
| --- | --- |

3.21.

| 3.22. | Before the pandemic, in many Member States there were major shortcomings when it came to care staff, such as: 1) staff shortage, a high percentage of temporary and part-time contracts, high staff turnover, low wages, little professional recognition, a lack of workers’ rights, such as unemployment rights or, in some cases, the recognition of COVID-19 as an occupational disease and even, in some countries, significant percentages of workers without a contract and in many cases without social entitlements or social security rights; 2) lack of training and accreditation for the carers (geriatric assistants, home-help assistants or carers) who provide the vast majority of care home and home care services (2). |
| --- | --- |

3.22.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  It should be pointed out that when the opinion talks about ‘care’, it is referring to all types of care for older people. Sometimes, for reasons of linguistic interpretation, confusion arises, for example with the French term ‘soins’ being taken to mean ‘healthcare’, whereas in English ‘care’ covers all types of care, including support with tasks such as: helping older people through conversation, walks, mobility assistance, shopping, household cleaning, and other domestic chores such as cooking or help getting dressed, etc. The term ‘care’ is used in this wider sense in the opinion. It therefore also covers the concept of ‘support’.

1

soins

(2)  Annex to Opinion SOC/687 (in English only).

2

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/27

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Rule of law and the recovery fund

(own-initiative opinion)

(2022/C 194/05)

| Rapporteur: | Christian BÄUMLER |
| --- | --- |

Rapporteur:

Christian BÄUMLER

| Plenary Assembly decision | 25.3.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Rule 32(2) of the Rules of Procedure |
| | Own-initiative opinion |
| Section responsible | Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship |
| Adopted in section | 16.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 20.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 204/14/18 |

Plenary Assembly decision

25.3.2021

Legal basis

Rule 32(2) of the Rules of Procedure

Own-initiative opinion

Section responsible

Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship

Adopted in section

16.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

20.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

204/14/18

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) underlines that the European Union is founded on values such as respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | In the EESC’s opinion, adherence to these values, in particular the rule of law, is of fundamental importance for EU citizens and for the survival of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | The EESC is committed to ensuring that the Council of the European Union and the European Commission impose high and dissuasive sanctions in the event of systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law that endanger the European Union budget. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | For the EESC, it is of paramount importance that the recovery programmes presented by the Member States set out the measures they will take to strengthen the rule of law. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | The EESC calls for all programmes supported by the EU budget to be subject to legal requirements on freedom of information and transparency. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | The EESC calls for participation in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office enhanced cooperation to become a prerequisite for participating in programmes financed by the EU budget. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | The EESC calls for the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) to be developed into an agency for the rule of law and administrative efficiency. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

| 1.8. | The EESC considers that systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law in Member States have a detrimental impact on the EU budget, and calls for the burden of proof to be reversed in this respect. |
| --- | --- |

1.8.

| 1.9. | The EESC calls for the EU to protect NGOs promoting human rights and the rule of law from undue influence and to support their funding. |
| --- | --- |

1.9.

| 1.10. | The EESC calls for the European institutions to launch a campaign with civil society entitled ‘My EU — My Rights’ that would initiate an EU-wide dialogue on the importance of the rule of law. |
| --- | --- |

1.10.

2.   General comments

Background of the proposal

| 2.1. | The European Union is founded on the values set out in Article 2 TEU. These values include respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. Furthermore, European society is characterised by pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men (1). |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | Respect for these values is of fundamental importance for all EU citizens. Against the backdrop of European history, particularly the crimes against humanity committed in the world wars, the European Union has made a promise of protection to ensure peace in Europe and to protect the fundamental rights of all its citizens. It follows that the European Union has a mandate to track and prevent systematic violations of these values. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | Moreover, respect for these values, particularly the rule of law, is a prerequisite for the EU’s existence in its current form: the European Union can comply with the principle of the rule of law only if all Member States meet the requirements thereof. Only this can ensure that EU policies, including expenditure from the European budget, are implemented correctly in all Member States. Furthermore, cooperation between Member States’ judiciaries and administrations is based on the mutual belief that all Member States share common values and apply them in practice. Only on this basis is it possible for Member State administrations and judicial bodies to cooperate across borders and to recognise and implement decisions from another Member State. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | Furthermore, the importance of these values, particularly the rule of law, should not be underestimated when it comes to the sustainable economic development of the European Union. Apart from guaranteeing investment certainty and respecting competition rules and other economic regulation, ensuring trust in the legal system as a whole is crucial for private investment and cross-border trade. A sustainable recovery of the European single market from the economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic therefore requires, in addition to specific support measures such as the recovery fund, respect for European values and especially the rule of law. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

| 2.5. | Finally, the principle of the rule of law and the other values referred to in Article 2 TEU are part of the European Union’s own sense of identity. The rule of law is an integral part of a democratic and pluralistic society in Europe — one of the founding promises of the Union. However, the importance of the rule of law also extends beyond the EU’s borders. The EU’s foreign and security policy is strongly based on the values set out in Article 2 TEU and on the principle of the rule of law. In its foreign policy, the European Union is committed to a law and values-based global order. The European Union can continue to credibly do so only if it and all its Member States meet these requirements. The Union’s internal cohesion and worldwide appeal are also crucially based on compliance with these values. |
| --- | --- |

2.5.

| 2.6. | The European institutions have consistently emphasised the importance of the values set out in Article 2 TEU, particularly respect for the rule of law, in numerous opinions and legislative acts. Among other possible sanctions, especially the infringement procedure under Article 263 TFEU, Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) now provides for the possibility of imposing financial penalties for systematic breaches of the rule of law. The main purpose of this is to protect the EU budget. It can also contribute more generally to better protection of the rule of law in all Member States. The Regulation is also intended to boost the EU’s credibility and thus facilitate investment. |
| --- | --- |

2.6.

| 2.7. | The EESC welcomes the introduction of this new regulation. In addition to safeguarding the rule of law and the financial interests of the Union, the Regulation also promotes public acceptance of financial transfers in the European Union and, in particular, of the recovery fund in all Member States. However, it is crucial for the effectiveness of the Regulation that it is implemented in practice and that swift and comprehensive sanctions are imposed for breaches of the rule of law which at the same time put the Union’s budget at risk. |
| --- | --- |

2.7.

| 2.8. | In addition to this new monitoring, which focuses in particular on the rule of law in the allocation of funds, the Commission should also continue to fully exercise and, where necessary, step up its general role in monitoring the EU budget. Indeed, any misappropriation of EU funds, even if it is not due to deficiencies in the rule of law, is damaging to European programmes and the image of the EU. In addition, the Commission should also ensure that EU citizens are better aware of which programmes the EU has funded or co-funded on the ground. To this end, the relevant rules on transparency and public information, such as via building project panels and online information, should also be adapted and the EU’s involvement more clearly highlighted. |
| --- | --- |

2.8.

3.   General requests

| 3.1. | The EESC calls for the new Regulation to be applied strictly in all areas relevant to the budget. In order to carry out the monitoring tasks conferred on it by the Regulation and the Treaties, the Commission needs to allocate appropriate human and financial resources and consistently follow up on signs of potential infringements. In doing so, the Commission must apply strictly objective criteria and investigate infringements in the same way in all Member States. In addition, the Commission should also monitor the proper implementation of EU programmes in third countries more closely and, in particular, apply the same criteria to candidate countries as apply to Member States. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

| 3.2. | In particular, the Commission and the Member States must ensure that no payments are made from the EU budget whose use cannot be fully demonstrated. All beneficiaries of payments from the Union budget, regardless of whether they are public or private entities, must be subject to appropriate transparency rules. Member States and the Commission should keep civil society fully informed about the use of funds and consult them on possible improvements in how funds are used. The planning and implementation of the budget require a transparent procedure and consultations, with the Member States also consulting civil society organisations. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.

| 3.3. | In the event of systematic deficiencies in the rule of law in the Member States, which at the same time put the EU budget at risk, an early and rapid response is required, particularly from the Commission. This is the only way to ensure that shortcomings are detected and corrected at an early stage. In addition, dissuasive penalties must be imposed in the event of infringements: in other areas too, such as competition law enforcement, the Commission imposes significant financial penalties to protect the application of EU law. The fundamental importance of the rule of law and the protection of the Union’s budget requires the Commission and the Council to impose substantial and dissuasive penalties in these areas as well. In the event of a possible reform of the Regulation, this should also be explicitly stated in the text of the Regulation. Furthermore, the EESC urges the Commission and the Council to coordinate closely with the European Parliament, and calls for the Parliament to have the same procedural rights as the Council in the event of a reform. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.

| 3.4. | The EESC believes that systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law in a Member State always undermine, or at least seriously jeopardise, the implementation of EU-funded programmes and thus the protection of the EU budget. Therefore, if systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law are identified in a Member State, the latter should bear the burden of proving that the implementation of EU-funded programmes and the protection of the EU budget are guaranteed. The EESC calls for this to be clarified in Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.

| 3.5. | Alongside the options provided for in Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092, the Commission, the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament should use all other means of sanction at their disposal in the event of systematic breaches of the rule of law. These especially include the infringement procedure under Article 263 TFEU and the procedure under Article 7 TEU. When applying these procedures, the aforementioned European institutions should also ensure that they are carried out as quickly as possible and that dissuasive penalties are imposed. Especially with regard to application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092, the Commission should issue guidelines without delay in order to be able to react quickly in the event of breaches of the rule of law. In those guidelines, the Commission should, in particular, lay down the conditions under which it regards a financial penalty as necessary and the financial penalties it considers appropriate. Furthermore, it should also set out the conditions under which it will additionally initiate an infringement procedure under Article 263 TFEU or a procedure under Article 7 TEU. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.

| 3.6. | In addition, the European Commission, the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament should continue to engage in a continuous dialogue on the rule of law with all Member States and clearly identify breaches of the rule of law publicly. The European institutions should cooperate even more with each other to further promote the rule of law and explore other possible ways to protect the rule of law in all Member States. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.

4.   Specific requests

| 4.1. | With regard to the recovery fund, the EESC finds it regrettable that the decisions of the European Commission assessing Member States’ programmes only address the fundamental importance of the rule of law to a limited extent. As explained above, the rule of law is fundamental to the sustainable economic development of the European Union and must therefore be duly taken into account in the framework of the recovery fund. It is therefore not enough for the Commission to base its assessment largely on economic indicators, such as those under the European Semester. As already called for by the EESC, the Commission should also take more account of the importance of the rule of law for sustainable economic development in the context of the European semester, and include relevant indicators (3). |
| --- | --- |

4.1.

| 4.2. | In the EESC’s view, the programmes submitted by the Member States to date generally include too few initiatives to strengthen the rule of law. The programmes of Italy, Croatia and the Czech Republic, for example, include individual rule of law initiatives, such as measures to combat corruption and increase the efficiency of judicial bodies. Overall, however, and with regard to all Member States, the EESC believes that this is not sufficient to reflect the fundamental importance of the rule of law. It is therefore of paramount importance for the EESC that all Member States set out in their national programmes the measures they will be taking to strengthen the rule of law. |
| --- | --- |

4.2.

| 4.3. | In addition, the EESC calls for further development of the requirements for implementing the EU budget, including Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092. In future, all programmes supported by the EU budget should be subject to far-reaching national laws on freedom of information and transparency, in order to provide press bodies, non-governmental organisations and civil society with easy and comprehensive access to information. An exception may be made only if national security interests so require. The European Commission should keep the suitability of these national laws on freedom of information under constant review and, if necessary, make proposals for amendments, while taking account of opinions from the European Parliament and the EESC, for example. |
| --- | --- |

4.3.

| 4.4. | The EESC supports the creation of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office as it will play a major role in protecting the EU’s financial interests and prosecuting cross-border crimes. The EESC is convinced that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is already having a deterrent effect and will contribute in the long term to a significant improvement in cross-border criminal prosecution. For these reasons, the EESC urges all Member States to take part in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office’s enhanced cooperation and calls for this to become a prerequisite for participating in EU-funded programmes. |
| --- | --- |

4.4.

| 4.5. | The newly created European Public Prosecutor’s Office takes over tasks that OLAF has hitherto performed. The EESC therefore calls for OLAF to be further developed into a European agency for the rule of law and administrative efficiency. This new agency should universally and continuously review the rule of law in the Member States and advise the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on the application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092. Furthermore, this new agency should issue general recommendations to enhance the rule of law and administrative efficiency of the Member States and, in this respect, support Member States and their administrations. Where Member States do not follow significant recommendations made by this agency, they should be required to justify this. |
| --- | --- |

4.5.

| 4.6. | Alongside this, the European Commission should also develop further initiatives to strengthen the rule of law and the application of European fundamental rights in all Member States. For example, exchange programmes, including under Erasmus+, should be set up and developed for staff of Member States’ judicial bodies, as well as of non-governmental organisations promoting in particular the rule of law and the protection of fundamental and human rights, in order to strengthen and develop a common understanding of the rule of law in Europe. To this end, the European Union should increase the funding for voluntary and cross-border training programmes for these members of the judiciary in the Member States; education programmes for non-governmental organisations promoting the rule of law and the protection of fundamental and human rights should also be supported. The aim should be to promote the European principle of the rule of law, which both takes into account the legal traditions of the Member States and reflects the binding nature of common minimum standards for all Member States. |
| --- | --- |

4.6.

| 4.7. | In the EESC’s view, civil society is particularly important in protecting the rule of law; it therefore also has a commensurate responsibility here. In order to strengthen the rule of law in all Member States, the Commission should therefore, through a new programme, increase its support both for civil society platforms that focus on protecting the rule of law in Member States and for corresponding educational programmes (4). Under this programme, the EU should support the funding of non-governmental organisations. Protection against undue influence and other interference with the independence of non-governmental organisations by policy-makers, lobbyists and other agents needs to be safeguarded. |
| --- | --- |

4.7.

| 4.8. | Finally, the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, the European Parliament and the EESC in particular should do more to raise awareness among all EU citizens of the importance of European values, especially the rule of law. The EU needs a communication strategy that combines the concept of the rule of law with everyday reality. To this end, the above-mentioned European institutions, in cooperation with other civil society actors, should launch a campaign entitled ‘My EU — My Rights’ on the importance of the rule of law, targeting all sections of the population, clearly explaining basic information for all on the topic of the rule of law, and initiating a general EU-wide dialogue on the subject (5). |
| --- | --- |

4.8.

Brussels, 20 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  Article 2 TEU.

1

(2)  Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (OJ L 433 I, 22.12.2020, p. 1).

2

(3)  See also: EESC opinion on The rule of law and its impact on economic growth, ECO/511 (OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 16), point 7.1 et seq.; and EESC opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council– Further strengthening the Rule of Law within the Union, SOC/627 (OJ C 282, 20.8.2019, p. 39), point 4.1 et seq.

3

The rule of law and its impact on economic growth

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council– Further strengthening the Rule of Law within the Union

(4)  See also: EESC opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council — Further strengthening the Rule of Law in the Union, SOC/627, point 3.9 et seq.; and EESC opinion on the European Democracy Action Plan, SOC/672 (OJ C 341, 24.8.2021, p. 56), point 6.2.1 et seq.

4

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council — Further strengthening the Rule of Law in the Union

European Democracy Action Plan

(5)  See also: EESC opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council — Further strengthening the Rule of Law in the Union, SOC/627, point 3.19; and EESC opinion on the European Democracy Action Plan, SOC/672, point 4.3.2.

5

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council — Further strengthening the Rule of Law in the Union

European Democracy Action Plan

---

ANNEX

The following amendments, which received at least a quarter of the votes cast, were rejected during the discussions (Rule 59(3) of the Rules of Procedure):

AMENDMENT 1

Tabled by:

TEDER Reet

SOC/692 — Rule of law and the recovery fund

Point 3.4

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The EESC believes that systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law in a Member State always undermine, or at least seriously jeopardise, the implementation of EU-funded programmes and thus the protection of the EU budget. Therefore, if systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law are identified in a Member State, the latter should
  bear the burden of proving that
  the implementation of EU-funded programmes and the protection of the EU budget
  are guaranteed
  . The EESC
  calls for
  this
  to
  be clarified in Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092. | The EESC believes that systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law in a Member State always undermine, or at least seriously jeopardise, the implementation of EU-funded programmes and thus the protection of the EU budget. Therefore, if systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law are identified in a Member State, the latter should
  be required to cooperate fully in detecting irregularities and addressing shortcomings in order to ensure
  the
  lawful
  implementation of EU-funded programmes and the protection of the EU budget. The EESC
  recommends that
  this be clarified in Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092. |

Section opinion

Amendment

The EESC believes that systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law in a Member State always undermine, or at least seriously jeopardise, the implementation of EU-funded programmes and thus the protection of the EU budget. Therefore, if systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law are identified in a Member State, the latter should
  bear the burden of proving that
  the implementation of EU-funded programmes and the protection of the EU budget
  are guaranteed
  . The EESC
  calls for
  this
  to
  be clarified in Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092.

The EESC believes that systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law in a Member State always undermine, or at least seriously jeopardise, the implementation of EU-funded programmes and thus the protection of the EU budget. Therefore, if systematic shortcomings with respect to the rule of law are identified in a Member State, the latter should
  be required to cooperate fully in detecting irregularities and addressing shortcomings in order to ensure
  the
  lawful
  implementation of EU-funded programmes and the protection of the EU budget. The EESC
  recommends that
  this be clarified in Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092.

Reason

The rule of law must be guaranteed through legitimate means. The burden of proof in its current form is one of the most important fundamental principles of legality. Changing or reversing the burden of proof would set an extremely dangerous precedent, which would in turn undermine the foundations of the rule of law.

Outcome of the vote:

| In favour: | 41 |
| --- | --- |
| Against: | 65 |
| Abstentions: | 13 |

In favour:

41

Against:

65

Abstentions:

13

AMENDMENT 2

Tabled by:

TEDER Reet

SOC/692 — Rule of law and the recovery fund

Point 1.6

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The EESC considers that
  systematic
  shortcomings with respect to the rule of law in Member States have a detrimental impact on the EU budget, and calls for
  the burden of proof to be reversed in this respect
  . | The EESC considers that shortcomings with respect to the rule of law in Member States have a detrimental impact on the EU budget, and calls
  , in this respect,
  for
  shortcomings to be addressed in a targeted way and for strict compliance with the rule of law when it comes to implementation of EU-funded programmes and protection of the EU budget
  . |

Section opinion

Amendment

The EESC considers that
  systematic
  shortcomings with respect to the rule of law in Member States have a detrimental impact on the EU budget, and calls for
  the burden of proof to be reversed in this respect
  .

The EESC considers that shortcomings with respect to the rule of law in Member States have a detrimental impact on the EU budget, and calls
  , in this respect,
  for
  shortcomings to be addressed in a targeted way and for strict compliance with the rule of law when it comes to implementation of EU-funded programmes and protection of the EU budget
  .

Reason

The rule of law must be guaranteed through legitimate means. The burden of proof in its current form is one of the most important fundamental principles of legality. Changing or reversing the burden of proof would set an extremely dangerous precedent, which would in turn undermine the foundations of the rule of law.

Outcome of the vote:

| In favour: | 72 |
| --- | --- |
| Against: | 141 |
| Abstentions: | 18 |

In favour:

72

Against:

141

Abstentions:

18

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/34

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘How will the identified industrial ecosystems contribute to the strategic autonomy of the EU and the well-being of Europeans?’

(exploratory opinion)

(2022/C 194/06)

| Rapporteur: | Sandra PARTHIE |
| --- | --- |

Rapporteur:

Sandra PARTHIE

| Referral | French Presidency of the Council of the European Union, 21.9.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Single Market, Production and Consumption |
| Adopted in section | 13.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 244/1/3 |

Referral

French Presidency of the Council of the European Union, 21.9.2021

Legal basis

Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Single Market, Production and Consumption

Adopted in section

13.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

19.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

244/1/3

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | For European economies to remain globally competitive, companies across many sectors have to adapt to new global competitors, reinvent business models and reassess supply chains. The ensuing change is structural and sometimes even disruptive, not only for businesses but also for people and their working conditions. The EESC highlights the ‘leave no one behind’ principle and calls for dialogue with all relevant actors on the management of this structural change. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | Openness to trade, investment and other forms of international collaboration is a strength and source of growth and well-being for the EU. The EESC supports the EU’s ambition to assume greater responsibility for its own security, reduce one-sided dependencies in critical areas and strengthen its capacity to set and implement its own priorities, moving to a state of economic competitiveness and enhanced resilience. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | Without being protectionist, it is necessary to act at European level through regulation as well as standard-setting to reduce the risk of strategic or structural shortages, diversify, protect intellectual property, and ensure rules-based and fair competition between Member States and with other global partners. In its transnational and global alliances, the EU must be able to identify violations of human rights, fundamental freedoms and the health and safety of both, people and the environment, throughout value and supply chains. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | In order to strengthen its manufacturing base the EESC recommends that the EU increases its R & D&I spending and other related funding instruments such as the Interregional Innovation Investment Instrument (1), putting it at least on a par with other regions in the world to enable much needed innovation. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | Furthermore, the EESC recommends adapting the Skills Agenda to future labour market needs. The industrial ecosystems approach should also translate into increasing EU citizens’ well-being in terms of quality jobs, remuneration and access to lifelong learning. In this context the EESC underlines its support for the EU Pact for Skills, which is crucial for ensuring long-term employment prospects for European citizens. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | The EESC believes it is important to achieve real upward convergence of EU economies, particularly in terms of productivity, social standards, occupational health and safety and environmentally-friendly production. The competitiveness of the European Single Market largely depends on developing and accessing the full potential of all national economies, which are still at very different levels and thus need different and targeted policies. The goal should be the eradication of economic disparities among Member States. Investments in research, development and new technologies are crucial. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | For a balanced view of well-being, the EESC agrees with the OECD’s assessment that we need comprehensive dashboards of statistics that reflect what matters to people, covering wide-ranging outcomes such as people’s income, health, social connections, safety and the environment. We need to look beyond country averages to understand not only whether life is getting better, but also for whom. Furthermore, we need to not only measure well-being today, but also the resources that help to sustain it into the future. Finally, structural change can be perceived by people as threatening, despite the results of economic analysis. Election gains by populist parties across the EU but also the Brexit vote can be traced to voters feeling disenfranchised by globalisation, and feeling a loss of control over their life decisions. This cannot be alleviated by statistics. Social partner and civil society organisations need to be much more involved by policy-makers in addressing grievances and fears of social hardship and in formulating and implementing solutions on the ground. The EESC supports a more open and participation-oriented sustainable corporate governance including information, consultation and participation of workers at the company level. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

2.   Background to the opinion, including the legislative proposal concerned

| 2.1. | The EESC points to the Conclusions of the European Council of 1-2 October 2020 which make the concept of strategic autonomy a central feature of the internal market, industrial policy and the digital sector. It also highlights the conclusions of the Competitiveness Council of 13 November 2020, which states that this includes identifying and reducing strategic dependencies and increasing resilience in the most sensitive industrial ecosystems and in specific areas, such as health, the defence industry, space, digital, energy, mobility industries and critical raw materials. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | The objectives of open strategic autonomy are stability, disseminating European standards and promoting the EU’s values. They are reflected in several recent initiatives, such as the Communication on Shaping Europe’s Digital Future of February 2020; the Communication on foreign direct investment (FDI Screening Regulation) adopted in March 2020; the EU Foreign Investment Screening Mechanism adopted in 2019 and fully operational in October 2020; the Data Strategy of November 2020; the ‘Open strategic autonomy’ trade policy review of February 2021, and the ongoing work on an anti-coercion instrument. Furthermore, the proposal for a Regulation on the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism of July 2021 is one example of the growing awareness of environmental topics within the EU. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | The Lisbon Strategy of 2000 was aimed at the EU becoming a knowledge-based economy and society, established quantifiable indicators and reinforced the need to support people in their lifelong learning pathways. The Pact for Skills is essential in terms of education, expertise and know-how, given some industrial sectors are facing major transformations in the framework of the dual digital and ecological transition. Additionally, as addressed in the Blueprint for Skills, the main stakeholders such as businesses, trade unions, research, education or training institutions and public authorities are indispensable actors in addressing sectoral skills needs. The EESC welcomes the work of the European Commission and sectoral partners such as the Sector Skills Council and European Sector Skills Alliances to overcome skills mismatches between industry demand for skills and education supply. (2) |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | The EESC also points to the Commission’s work on Critical Raw Materials Resilience (3), which aims to chart a path towards greater sustainability and security and the related EESC opinion (4), as well as to the assessments delivered by the EESC on various industrial ecosystems and sectors (5). |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

3.   General comments

| 3.1. | The EU is based on an open economic model with 14 % of the world’s imports carried out by the EU and 16 % of the world’s exports originating in the EU. EESC supports the view that it is essential for Europe’s industrial policy to find the ways and means to reduce one-sided dependencies on others, in strategic areas ranging from technology to food and health, for example. An industrial policy with a strong industrial manufacturing base should thwart the potential negative effects of disruption. Security of supply may also be achieved through partnerships with ‘like-minded countries’. The EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC) for instance is aimed at providing such partnerships. In order to protect itself against trade asymmetries, the EESC also supports the EU’s endeavours to put into place and improve trade defence instruments such as the EU Foreign Investment Screening Mechanism (6), the EU International Procurement Instrument (7) and the Regulation to address distortions caused by foreign subsidies in the Single Market proposed by the European Commission in May 2021 (8). |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

| 3.2. | A bottom-up analysis of strategic dependencies conducted by the Commission shows that dependencies in the most sensitive ecosystems represent only 0,6 % of the value of goods imported from outside the EU. Thus, many value chains have shown remarkable resilience during the pandemic. The EESC strongly supports the work of the Commission to map strategic dependencies and capacities. The analysis also casts light on the fact that out of 5 200 products imported into the EU, 137 belong to sensitive ecosystems on which the EU is highly dependent — mainly in the energy-intensive industries (such as raw materials) and health ecosystems (such as active pharmaceutical ingredients) as well as products relevant to supporting the green and digital transition. 52 % of imports of these dependent products originate in China. 34 products are potentially more vulnerable because of their possibly low potential for further diversification and substitution with EU production. To improve the competitiveness of European industry, robust sustainable energy and digital technology policies are required. The EESC wants to underline that European digital healthcare and renewable energy players are among the global leaders. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.

| 3.3. | Open Strategic autonomy is characterised by the existence of production capacity in future-oriented sectors within the European Single Market especially for high-value goods where it is essential to maintain the EU’s technological and innovation potential. For instance, the Commission’s assessment shows that Europe has a world market share of 33 % in robotics, 30 % in embedded systems, 55 % in automotive semiconductors, 20 % in semiconductor equipment and 20 % in photonics components (9). Strategic autonomy involves trade defence instruments in a context of growing international competition and unlawful competition. The EU’s industrial policy therefore goes hand in hand with a strong trade and competition policy. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.

| 3.4. | The EESC underlines that increasing open strategic autonomy includes strengthening the resilience of the Single Market, investing in the EU’s own competence and technological capacity and R & D resources, diversifying production and supply chains, securing digital sovereignty, ensuring strategic stockpiling, fostering and attracting investments and production in Europe by improving the conditions in which businesses operate, exploring alternative solutions and circular economy models, and promoting broad industrial cooperation across Member States, as well as aiming for technological leadership as stated by the Competitiveness Council in November 2020. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.

| 3.5. | The Single Market is Europe’s biggest asset and the Commission should continue to focus its efforts to enhance its resilience by implementing and enforcing rules, and removing barriers to achieve the goal of an innovative, prosperous and future-oriented European economy. A strong home market is a precondition for European companies to be set up, develop, thrive and avoid future disruption, for example with the help of the Single Market Emergency Instrument. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.

| 3.6. | The EESC in its opinion No Green Deal without a Social Deal stresses the importance of a strong forward-looking social dialogue and a participation-oriented sustainable corporate governance. The EESC also endorses the fact that workers are informed and consulted and promotes their participation at the company level with a view to fostering workplace innovation (10). In its December 2020 Resolution on sustainable corporate governance, the European Parliament welcomed the Commission’s commitment to reviewing the Non-Financial Reporting Directive and developing non-financial reporting standards (11). Adhering to the principles of sustainable corporate governance is an important way of promoting European values abroad and provides a competitive advantage for European companies. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.

| 3.7. | The socioeconomic situation in the EU Member States and regions is still very different, and so it is important to ensure that targeted, regional transition paths are developed in the context of a specific governance process for the various ecosystems, including supporting access to new markets, especially for SMEs, and sustainable value chains. The EESC supports governance approaches such as regional transformation commissions or transformation hubs that, in close cooperation with local and regional economic actors, define specific local and regional solutions for the economic changes ahead. |
| --- | --- |

3.7.

| 3.8. | As regards improving industrial cooperation across EU Member States, the EESC appreciates the analytical work carried out by the Commission on defining and outlining 14 ‘industrial ecosystems’. The analysis reflects similar exercises by the US and China. They fall into two different categories; an ecosystem defined as a network of clusters belonging to a particular area of activity and a regional ecosystem, which looks at the interaction of economic agents in a given region. Together, they provide an interactive platform to optimise cooperation between authorities and stakeholders and to facilitate communication among actors. The EESC sees real added value for businesses, which can voice a particular need to a whole ecosystem which is able to respond. The deeper and denser an ecosystem is, the more useful it will be for all actors involved and the larger the added value it will provide. |
| --- | --- |

3.8.

| 3.9. | The EU and its Member States focus on public programmes in cutting-edge science at EU level. Similarly, R&I budgets have been transferred from the national to the EU level and are larger than ever, although still below the levels of strategic competitors such as China; a fourth round of ‘moon-shot programmes’ is targeted at relaunching the EU’s global leadership in R&I. This should include Large Enterprise AI-Models (LEAM), Common Industrial Dataspaces and emerging green technologies, and reinforce R & D&I with a view to creating synthetic substitutes for critical raw materials. |
| --- | --- |

3.9.

| 3.10. | R & D expenditure within the European Union as a percentage of GDP stood at 2 % in 2019. In comparison, China spent 2 % of its GDP on R & D in 2019 and the USA 3 %. In order to strengthen its manufacturing base the EESC would recommend that the EU increase its R & D spending, and deplores the fact that, apart from core public investments in R&I, and strong private conglomerates in climate mitigation and health industries, EU innovation ecosystems are not flourishing enough (12). While effective competition in the EU is an excellent incentive for companies to innovate, they should nonetheless be better supported by fully utilising other EU-level R & D&I funding instruments to put the EU at least on a par with other regions in the world to enable much needed innovation. Currently, EU investments mainly aim to support domestic, i.e. national Member State interests as opposed to looking for European approaches and solutions, creating and benefiting from better and deeper links between economic agents. |
| --- | --- |

3.10.

| 3.11. | The EESC strongly supports calls for enhanced ecosystems and value chains and collaboration between them and believes that they need to be linked to the dual green and digital transition to improve the well-being of Europeans. Transition pathways will add value by proposing a meaningful sequencing of policies and provide predictability, which is important for businesses and the well-being of citizens, e.g. with regard to skills development. In this context, we want to highlight stakeholder-centric economic models with mitigating climate change and environmental destruction as the leading driver, and call on Member States and the Commission to make use of these models to a larger extent in their policy formulations and impact assessments. |
| --- | --- |

3.11.

| 3.12. | Investments to create more resilient and sustainable value chains that provide access to essential services and goods must deliver results in terms of economic growth and well-being. Sectoral action plans should be established that are linked to the initiatives of existing major economic players and strengthen existing economic groups in Europe, including SMEs. This should entail institutional support to enable them to better control value chains and anticipating crises by implementing stress tests or risk assessments to prevent shortages. |
| --- | --- |

3.12.

| 3.13. | Defining the right strategic value chains, supply chains and clusters will be key. By promoting IPCEIs and setting up industrial alliances on batteries for electric vehicles, High-Performance Computing, microelectronics, connected, clean and autonomous vehicles, smart health, low-carbon industry, hydrogen technologies and systems, the industrial internet of Things, and cybersecurity, the Commission has made clear which areas should be developed as priorities and with a real EU added value. Together with safeguarding European interests with regards to European-developed standards, and the protection of European intellectual property, this forms a strong basis for a coherent set of industrial and economic policies. |
| --- | --- |

3.13.

| 3.14. | This is not only a goal in itself but aimed at preserving and sustaining the well-being of Europeans by providing quality jobs in future-oriented sectors, while also working towards the twin transition. In order to achieve these goals, the right indicators and metrics need to be employed. The EESC believes that ‘well-being’ has matured as a statistical and measurement concept, turning into a ‘compass’ for policy-makers to guide their decisions. |
| --- | --- |

3.14.

| 3.15. | The EESC agrees with the OECD’s definition of the ‘Economy of Well-being’ as an economy that:






  1) | expands the opportunities available to people for upward social mobility and for improving their lives along the dimensions that matter most to them; |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.15.

1)

expands the opportunities available to people for upward social mobility and for improving their lives along the dimensions that matter most to them;

| 2) | ensures that these opportunities translate into well-being outcomes for all segments of the population, including those at the bottom of the distribution; |
| --- | --- |

2)

ensures that these opportunities translate into well-being outcomes for all segments of the population, including those at the bottom of the distribution;

| 3) | reduces inequalities; and |
| --- | --- |

3)

reduces inequalities; and

| 4) | fosters environmental and social sustainability. |
| --- | --- |

4)

fosters environmental and social sustainability.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  https://eismea.ec.europa.eu/programmes/interregional-innovation-investments-i3-instrument_en

1

(2)  Blueprint for Sectoral Cooperation on Skills. Responding to skills mismatches at sectoral level. A key action of the New Skills Agenda for Europe.

2

(3)  European Commission, Critical Raw Materials Resilience: Charting a Path towards greater Security and Sustainability, COM(2020) 474.

3

(4)  OJ C 220, 9.6.2021, p. 118.

4

(5)  EESC opinion ‘The EU mobility strategy and EU industrial value chains: automotive eco-systems approach’ (OJ C 105, 4.3.2022, p. 26); EESC supplementary opinion ‘Updating the new industrial strategy — Impacts on the health industrial ecosystem’) (OJ C 105, 4.3.2022, p. 152); EESC opinion on Anticipation of structural and sectoral change and reshaping industrial cultures — up to new borders of recovery and resilience in the different parts of Europe (ongoing EESC opinion on ‘Sustainability requirements for batteries in the EU’ (OJ C 220, 9.6.2021, p. 128); EESC opinion on Glass in Europe at a crossroads: delivering a greener, energy-efficient industry, while enhancing competitiveness and maintaining quality jobs (OJ C 105, 4.3.2022, p. 18).

5

(6)  European Commission, ‘EU foreign investment screening mechanism becomes fully operational’, 9 October 2020,

6

(7)  European Parliamentary Research Service, ‘EU international procurement instrument’, October 2021.

7

(8)  European Commission, ‘Commission proposes new Regulation to address distortions caused by foreign subsidies in the Single Market’, 5 May 2021.

8

(9)  European Commission, Investing in a smart, innovative and sustainable Industry. A renewed EU Industrial Policy Strategy, (COM(2017) 479 final).

9

(10)  OJ C 341, 24.8.2021, p. 23

10

(11)  European Parliament resolution of 17 December 2020 on sustainable corporate governance (2020/2137(INI)).

11

(12)  JRC Science for Policy Report, Shaping & Securing the EU’s open strategic autonomy by 2040 and beyond; 2021.

12

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/39

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Innovative financial instruments as part of the development of social impact companies’

(exploratory opinion)

(2022/C 194/07)

| Rapporteur: | Giuseppe GUERINI |
| --- | --- |
| Co-rapporteur: | Marie-Pierre LE BRETON |

Rapporteur:

Giuseppe GUERINI

Co-rapporteur:

Marie-Pierre LE BRETON

| Referral | French Presidency of the Council of the European Union, 21.9.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Adopted in section | 13.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 231/1/3 |

Referral

French Presidency of the Council of the European Union, 21.9.2021

Legal basis

Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Adopted in section

13.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

19.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

231/1/3

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | The EESC welcomes the decision of the French Presidency of the Council of the EU, and the specific commitment of the Ministry of Economy and Finance and of the French Government to support the implementation of the Social Economy Action Plan. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | The EESC considers it important to develop innovative financial instruments capable of generating positive social impact; firstly through actions led by social economy organisations, but also through the involvement of all enterprises that have positive social impact goals. Consequently, the EESC welcomes and supports the provisions of the action plan for the social economy presented by the European Commission on 9 December 2021, in particular the proposal to encourage the setting up of markets for investment in social enterprises in Europe by supporting the creation of new instruments. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | The EESC believes that recognition of the social economy and of the community as one of the 14 European industrial strategy ecosystems contributes to the promotion of social impact investments, and thus welcomes this recognition. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | The EESC considers it important to introduce and support forms of investments aimed at generating social impact, creating high-quality jobs and attracting private investors and new capital, but recommends that these investments be developed in a way that generates additional and multiplier effects, while never replacing public social expenditure on essential services. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | The EESC supports (i) the social impact assessment tools and indicators being co-built upstream on a project-by-project basis, thus ensuring that the specific characteristics of social economy organisations are respected and (ii) that a European definition of social impact is developed. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | The EESC recommends that investments aimed at generating social impact be designed to strike a balance between the social impact (positive changes generated by the investment), the level of return (responsible and sustainable for the investor) and the level of risk to the social enterprise. They should strengthen social entrepreneurship through a new inflow of invested capital and improved transparency and social responsibility standards, and improve the capacity to include social impact and social economy enterprises in the European economic system. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | The EESC appreciates the initiatives implemented by the European Commission in recent years, in particular, those related to the EaSI programme, and welcomes the fact that InvestEU has a specific allocation aimed at strengthening the European social infrastructure. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

| 1.8. | In order to encourage the Member States and the Commission to give new impetus to these initiatives, the EESC considers it important that regular analyses be carried out to map the various innovation systems in order to support social impact financing in the Member States, with the aim of building a shared knowledge base and promoting the exchange of best practices. |
| --- | --- |

1.8.

| 1.9. | The EESC believes that it is essential to establish an EU-level body to steer and monitor innovative social economy financing initiatives and enterprises aiming to achieve social impact goals. |
| --- | --- |

1.9.

2.   General comments

| 2.1. | For many years, the EESC has supported the need for the European institutions and the Member States to strive to strengthen the role of the social economy in a European context. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | Recently in opinion ECO/533 (1), the EESC recommended that the Capital Markets Union (CMU) take full account of the different forms of social impact investment, particularly in the field of the social economy. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | Over the past decade, awareness-raising and the recognition of the role of social economy organisations has led to an increasing focus on social impact investments, which should further develop the already significant potential of social economy enterprises regarding responsible and sustainable innovation and job creation (2). |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | Europe is in increasing need of inclusive and responsible financing, and the European Union needs to commit to introducing measures and guidelines not only for institutions, enterprises and financial funds, but also for universities, research centres and social and local economy stakeholders, on ways to develop social entrepreneurship potential and influence funding as agents for the development of a more inclusive and sustainable economy. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

| 2.5. | Many social economy organisations provide essential services for disadvantaged population groups. These include social, health, care and education services, and in general, all services that enable vulnerable people to live with dignity, first and foremost by guaranteeing suitable working conditions. |
| --- | --- |

2.5.

| 2.6. | For this reason, social impact investments must be developed in a way that generates additional and multiplier effects in public policies — while preventing social impact investments from replacing public funds — especially for companies active in areas covered by social policies aimed at vulnerable people. |
| --- | --- |

2.6.

| 2.7. | We have all been faced with social challenges brought on by the pandemic that prevent us from achieving ambitious sustainable transition goals (poverty and inequality, migrant integration difficulties, gaps in the inclusion of people with disabilities and unattainable housing for vulnerable families and young people). It is therefore time to support an economic growth model and a business process capable of promoting social objectives, among which, priority must be given to promoting high-quality employment. |
| --- | --- |

2.7.

3.   Definition of innovative financial instruments

| 3.1. | Given that the EESC concurs with the provisions of the action plan for the social economy concerning the need to introduce innovative financial instruments aimed at developing social impact enterprises and social economy enterprises, the EESC considers it very important to emphasise that these financial instruments include a wide range of investments based on the assumption that private capital can contribute to creating positive social effects, which should always be considered as a priority, and, at the same time, generate economic benefits. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

| 3.2. | What makes these instruments stand out is the investor’s intention to pursue social objectives by creating common assets and common values, while also ensuring a balanced economic return, which is largely dedicated to achieving social objectives. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.

| 3.3. | Active stakeholders who promote and create these innovative instruments can be enterprises, organisations or funds working to produce a measurable social impact that is compatible with the economic impact. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.

| 3.4. | The following elements must characterise social impact investments:






  — | having a clear and intentional goal to create positive social impact; |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.4.

—

having a clear and intentional goal to create positive social impact;

| — | supporting enterprises that are clearly defined as social economy enterprises, based on commonly accepted definitions and objective criteria; |
| --- | --- |

—

supporting enterprises that are clearly defined as social economy enterprises, based on commonly accepted definitions and objective criteria;

| — | setting expectation levels based on fair, sustainable and transparent economic returns, even where return rates could be lower than average market returns; |
| --- | --- |

—

setting expectation levels based on fair, sustainable and transparent economic returns, even where return rates could be lower than average market returns;

| — | the willingness to reinvest part of the assets to fuel other investments that pursue social objectives; |
| --- | --- |

—

the willingness to reinvest part of the assets to fuel other investments that pursue social objectives;

| — | a measurable impact, which is essential for ensuring transparency, and an adequate knowledge of the goals and objectives of the investment; |
| --- | --- |

—

a measurable impact, which is essential for ensuring transparency, and an adequate knowledge of the goals and objectives of the investment;

| — | where investments are intended for enterprises in the social economy, consistency with statutory principles and values must be a priority. |
| --- | --- |

—

where investments are intended for enterprises in the social economy, consistency with statutory principles and values must be a priority.

| 3.5. | Social impact investments should, in particular, support enterprises engaged in innovation and community development, which would otherwise not be able to grow. They should also ensure residents have an adequate level of service. They should be able to produce potential drivers of inclusive economic growth. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.

| 3.6. | Investments in enterprises and organisations that aim to generate social impact are in a position to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of public spending on social, education, health and cultural promotion services and support employment through increased investor participation in order to support an entrepreneurial ecosystem that combines economic sustainability and social responsibility. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.

4.   The complex issue of defining social economy enterprises

| 4.1. | While there is an increasing focus on analysing and understanding social economy enterprises and the innovative financial instruments that can best support them, numerous obstacles still need to be overcome to ensure that alongside social economy enterprises, an equally innovative, responsible and sustainable financial ecosystem can be built, to develop the effective implementation of a truly European economic model which benefits citizens and enterprises. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.

| 4.2. | Many social economy organisations face obstacles in terms of full access to innovative financial instruments, such as holdings in private equity funds, quasi-equity instruments, as well as collateralised and long-term loans, and lastly earmarking solidarity-based financing in the context of employee savings schemes for social enterprises. Among these obstacles, we can identify four areas where the gap needs to be addressed:






  — | filling information gaps and correcting credit providers’ perceptions as well as legal definitions, and the recognition of their specific economic nature; |
| --- | --- | --- |

4.2.

—

filling information gaps and correcting credit providers’ perceptions as well as legal definitions, and the recognition of their specific economic nature;

| — | improving the skills of financial sector actors by assessing the functioning of social economy organisations from a financial point of view; |
| --- | --- |

—

improving the skills of financial sector actors by assessing the functioning of social economy organisations from a financial point of view;

| — | supporting the training of social economy organisations to improve their economic and financial skills; |
| --- | --- |

—

supporting the training of social economy organisations to improve their economic and financial skills;

| — | improving the provision of information for social economy organisations, enabling financial arrangements to be used, thus combating levels of non-take-up. |
| --- | --- |

—

improving the provision of information for social economy organisations, enabling financial arrangements to be used, thus combating levels of non-take-up.

| 4.3. | On the first point, the EESC hopes that the social economy action plan will be an opportunity to encourage European institutions and Member States to reach an agreement on a definition valid for both public institutions and financial institutions in the European Union, which is increasingly necessary to ensure full access to the capital market, including through non-financial support measures geared towards strengthening the skills of the actors involved in social impact investments. |
| --- | --- |

4.3.

| 4.4. | In this respect, the EESC considers that the capital markets action plan for people and businesses should focus more on the social economy’s role in attracting social impact investments in Europe (3). |
| --- | --- |

4.4.

| 4.5. | With regard to improving the capacity to assess innovative social investments, we believe that financial operators apply, in far too many cases, a high-risk level to social economy organisations simply because they use tools commonly used to assess other kinds of enterprises. This creates a misclassification that tends to underestimate the more specific dimensions of the social economy such as social and human capital, reputation, social function, social consensus, a focus on general-interest objectives, and the ability to generate common assets. It is what could be described as an excessive measure of resources due to the lack of instruments to properly measure the purpose. |
| --- | --- |

4.5.

| 4.6. | Social economy organisations make implementing social, educational and environmental goals their main priority. This social aim must be fully reconciled with economic and financial requirements, one of the levers for the sustainability of these organisations, which requires support for training and skills for staff in economic and financial matters. |
| --- | --- |

4.6.

5.   Innovative financial instruments and social taxonomies

| 5.1. | Financial instruments dedicated to social enterprises have developed (4) considerably over the past decade, however there is still room to develop further and better address the needs of social enterprises, as well as supporting their growth in the internal market. The EESC considers that this growth needs to go hand in hand with the development of a culture of evaluation across all these organisations, in particular in academia, and of specific social economy evaluation tools. |
| --- | --- |

5.1.

| 5.2. | Between 12 June and 27 August 2021, the European Commission launched a consultation on social and environmental taxonomy. In this regard, the EESC draws attention to the need to avoid creating competition or even more serious conflict between environmental and social taxonomies. |
| --- | --- |

5.2.

| 5.3. | The development of a single taxonomy model (social and environmental) is an ideal solution, precisely because of the close link between social and environmental objectives, but in order to be feasible and flexible, it should not impose heavy burdens on businesses. |
| --- | --- |

5.3.

| 5.4. | Social economy enterprises are rooted in local communities where the participatory dimension predominates, and are also characterised by their social commitments such as job creation, job support and retention, fair remuneration policy and equal rights in the workplace. This is also explained by the fact that social economy enterprises generally have a participatory governance structure based on democracy, openness and transparency. These aspects should be taken into account and especially encouraged in the social taxonomy. |
| --- | --- |

5.4.

| 5.5. | Social taxonomy should help to influence financing in order to complement public resources, which often provide inadequate support for social inclusion policies. However, social financing should never replace the role of the institutions, laws and public policies in pursuing the enforcement of social rights, balancing inequalities and combating discrimination. |
| --- | --- |

5.5.

| 5.6. | With regard to services of general interest specifically, these must be financed through public funds, and can only be complemented with private capital. Enterprises which generate social impact play a crucial role in society, which is why investments in them must rely, as far as possible, on stable financial funds and patient capital. It must be borne in mind that social objectives are set over a long period of time. |
| --- | --- |

5.6.

| 5.7. | Measurements and measurement methods could favour sectors which are more easily measurable, where there are more resources or more data available, to the detriment of areas where the objective measurement is more complex or where data are more difficult to obtain; steps must be taken to ensure that this does not happen. Collaboration between the public, private and the social sectors is necessary in order to achieve success in the social investment. The collaboration of the social sector is essential in order to prioritise the necessities, since they are the ones who work on the ground and know the needs. |
| --- | --- |

5.7.

6.   Proposals based on good practices on the ground

| 6.1. | In recent years, on the impetus of the Social Business Initiative of 2011, the European Commission has adopted various initiatives, both directly and through the European Investment Fund, to support social innovation and increase access to financing for social economy organisations. The EaSI Funded programmes, EaSI Debt, EaSI Guarantee, EaSI Capacity Building, and EFSI Equity Social Impact are particularly interesting. For future programming, the social initiatives envisaged by the InvestEU programme are also promising, especially if, as announced in the action plan for the social economy, specific innovations promoting social investment are introduced. |
| --- | --- |

6.1.

| 6.2. | In order to promote a social-investment-friendly ecosystem, the EESC considers it important, when implementing the NRRPs that the Member States are preparing to implement with Next Generation EU financing to take a certain number of actions, such as those set out below. |
| --- | --- |

6.2.

| 6.3. | Experiments to introduce and validate ‘pay by result’ financing mechanisms have been developed in many countries. In France for example, through social outcomes contracting, paying particular attention to outcome-based financial models which involve private investors willing to mobilise resources for policies that have been agreed with the government (in particular in the area of social policies), payment for which is linked to achieving the expected results. The promotion of these practices must be based on prior assessments aimed at identifying potential negative trends such as capacity transfers to enterprises outside the scope of the social economy, or Member States pulling back from their commitments. |
| --- | --- |

6.3.

| 6.4. | The ‘Centre of Expertise for Impact Investment’, created by the Finnish government, is one of the most interesting best practices. Through this centre, technical and professional support is provided to enhance the skills of those who intend to make investments with a social impact. |
| --- | --- |

6.4.

| 6.5. | These initiatives confirm the importance of supporting the creation, development and accessibility of impact funds, funds of funds or other financial instruments that finance social economy enterprise initiatives. This should be done, in particular, by channelling funds such as InvestEU or the just transition fund to also promote forms of co-investments (equity), co-financing (credit) and credit guarantees for market operations. |
| --- | --- |

6.5.

| 6.6. | There needs to be improvement in the European institutions’ and Member States’ capacity to collect and analyse the data needed to demonstrate that social enterprises and infrastructures are less likely to default than the average for bank credit loans. This would promote recognition of capital absorption ratios that take into account the social value of this type of financing. |
| --- | --- |

6.6.

| 6.7. | The EESC has already called for supporting factors in the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) (5), particularly ecological and social ones, to reduce the absorption of capital set aside by banks to cover loans to finance social economy enterprises. |
| --- | --- |

6.7.

| 6.8. | It is of course important to note the role played by alternative and ethical banks in many European countries in promoting finance geared to social and environmental objectives, which in some cases have also resulted in investment funds and managed savings companies aimed at investing in the social and environmental sector. |
| --- | --- |

6.8.

| 6.9. | Tax arrangements facilitating investments in the social economy and able to highlight the social impact actually generated could be useful to encourage both issuers and subscribers. |
| --- | --- |

6.9.

| 6.10. | It would also be crucial to encourage and promote patient capital, such as association and participation bonds aimed at strengthening the equity of associations and cooperatives. Moreover, in order to encourage investment in social economy enterprises, incentive rules facilitating the use of these innovative tools would also be useful for pension fund managers. |
| --- | --- |

6.10.

| 6.11. | It is important, following the French experience with the legally-regulated earmarking of outstanding regulated bank savings and of solidarity-based employee savings funds respectively for social economy enterprises, certified social impact enterprises, and solidarity funds, to expand the regulation of solidarity-based finance funds in order to optimise earmarking levels for social enterprises and to unlock additional equity or quasi-equity investment capacity. |
| --- | --- |

6.11.

| 6.12. | Among the good practices implemented by social economy enterprises (in particular cooperatives) are those which transform companies in crisis into workers organised as cooperatives. Known as ‘worker buy-outs’ (WBOs) (6), these have been implemented in France, Italy and Spain, through financing arrangements by creating specific mutualised capital funds (which involve a holding in the capital) that co-finance commercial activities with workers through the creation of a cooperative. |
| --- | --- |

6.12.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  OJ C 155, 30.4.2021, p. 20.

1

(2)  OJ C 286, 16.7.2021, p. 13.

2

(3)  A Capital Markets Union for people and businesses — new action plan (COM(2020) 590 final).

3

(4)  A general analysis can be found in the EC publication A recipe book for social finance https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/f1b8099b-fd4c-11e5-b713-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF/source-234506515.

4

A recipe book for social finance

(5)  OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 1.

5

(6)  Business transfers to employees under the form of a cooperative in Europe: opportunities and challenges, CECOP, 2013.

6

Business transfers to employees under the form of a cooperative in Europe: opportunities and challenges

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/44

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘The benefits of the outermost regions for the EU’

(exploratory opinion)

(2022/C 194/08)

| Rapporteur: | Joël DESTOM |
| --- | --- |
| Co-rapporteur: | Gonçalo LOBO XAVIER |

Rapporteur:

Joël DESTOM

Co-rapporteur:

Gonçalo LOBO XAVIER

| Referral | Council — French presidency, 21.9.2021
  Letter from Clément BEAUNE, Minister of State for European Affairs |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion |
| Adopted in section | 14.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 20.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 216/3/6 |

Referral

Council — French presidency, 21.9.2021

Letter from Clément BEAUNE, Minister of State for European Affairs

Legal basis

Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion

Adopted in section

14.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

20.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

216/3/6

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | The EESC recognises that despite the thousands of kilometres separating them from the European continent, the outermost regions (ORs) are an integral part of the EU. The outermost regions (ORs) are islands, archipelagos and one land territory (French Guiana). Nine of these regions are located in the western Atlantic Ocean, the Caribbean basin, the Amazon forest and the Indian Ocean: French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Saint-Martin, Réunion and Mayotte (France), the Azores and Madeira (Portugal) and the Canary Islands (Spain). The ORs have almost five million inhabitants. The EESC stresses that ORs represent Europe on a global level and provide Europe with a maritime area unmatched by any other power, and multiple geostrategic assets. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | The EESC calls on the Commission to consider the considerable benefits that the ORs can provide for the future of Europe, to frame them as test-beds for promoting progress on a global scale (Europe’s food and energy autonomy, the green transition, sustainable tourism, social inclusion, the involvement of civil society organisations, etc.). The ORs can become models which can be replicated in the various geographical areas in which they are located. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | The COVID-19 pandemic has underlined the importance of a robust and resilient food system that can operate in all circumstances and provide people with enough food at affordable prices. The Farm to Fork strategy is a new comprehensive approach that shows just how important food sustainability is for Europeans. It is a way to improve lifestyles, health and the environment. European policy in the outermost regions must promote their food autonomy so that they can act as trailblazers for Europe. The ORs are regions of opportunity, where certain traditional economic sectors benefit from permanent European support. Emerging sectors need to be better supported. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.3.1. | The EESC calls on the Commission to take into account the specific nature of the ORs into its work schedule for the Farm to Fork Strategy and to ensure that the POSEI national programmes (Programme of Options Specifically Relating to Remoteness and Insularity) comply with the key objective of promoting sustainable agriculture. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.1.

| 1.4. | The EESC calls on the Commission to speed up the delivery in the ORs of European projects financed by the EU seeking to identify locally-generated, sustainable and affordable sources of energy, if necessary by triggering Article 349 of the TFEU. The objective is to show that they are capable of developing systems based on renewable energy. Energy costs are generally higher in these regions than on the mainland, and so the ORs can become test-beds as Europe strives to achieve energy autonomy. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | The EESC calls on the Commission to ensure that Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) (Renewable Energy Directive) is implemented and that Article 29(13) thereof is deleted, because the European Union cannot subsidise the ORs’ energy transition while contributing to deforestation in non-EU countries. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | The EESC calls on the Commission not to reduce dedicated support to the ORs in the economic context of a post-COVID-19 recovery, since they need adequate financial resources to achieve the objectives set out in the EU strategy set out in the Fit for 55 package. The ORs are regions whose geographical characteristics leave them heavily exposed to the risks linked to extreme climatic events (such as hurricanes, destructive waves, earthquakes and droughts) which regularly affect their populations. They will therefore be the first to suffer the consequences of climate change. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | The EESC calls on the Commission to ensure that the implementation of Article 349 TFEU does not hinder the review of climate, energy and transport legislation, which aims to bring current texts into line with the goals for 2030 and 2050. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

| 1.7.1. | This transition to 2030 (and beyond to climate neutrality) must be a collective and inclusive effort, co-designed with the industrial ecosystems. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.1.

| 1.7.2. | The updated Industrial Strategy announced the co-creation of transition pathways with social partners and other stakeholders to chart how best to accelerate and benefit from the twin transitions, looking at the scale, speed and conditions facing each ecosystem. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.2.

| 1.8. | The EESC calls on the Commission to develop a specific pathway for the ORs’ ecosystem which will specify the scale of the needs, in particular reskilling, investment or technology needs and devise actions to meet them, building on inputs such as industrial strategy roadmaps. Something along the lines of the INSULAE programme for energy autonomy implemented by the EU’s Horizon 2020 programme, could be a starting point for implementing these roadmaps. |
| --- | --- |

1.8.

| 1.9. | The EESC calls on the Commission to develop strong policy guidelines for tourism: the aim is to bring together and think about a change of scale, integrating sustainability principles into all activities, for all occupations, since tourism plays a major role in the ORs’ development, because of its multiple spill-over effects and its significant job creation potential, especially for young people. Sustainable tourism must become the ORs’ identity. All stakeholders involved in tourism have their role to play in the sustainable development of the sector. The implementation of recovery plans in these regions must build on the diversity of services and professions involved in development, as well as the substantial contribution of micro, small and medium-sized businesses to tourism. While the context calls for consideration of the sector’s specific characteristics, the measures needed to ensure the quality of jobs and of trade balances also need to be defined. This will require robust political guidelines: the aim is to bring together and think about a change of scale, integrating sustainability principles into all activities, for all occupations. |
| --- | --- |

1.9.

| 1.10. | The EESC calls for support for the most vulnerable communities and for reflection on how to involve as many people as possible in the climate, digital and social transitions. No transition will be possible if local communities are not fully engaged in these changes, as the ORs’ development is based on exceptional but fragile ecosystems. This means anticipating the impact of future policies because the ORs will not escape the changes brought about by the major climate, digital and social transitions. They need to anticipate the total transformation of their economies in order to meet future demands and do this while paying the utmost attention to the social impact of these transitions. Care should therefore be taken to support the most vulnerable communities and to consider ways to get as many people as possible involved in — and if possible enthusiastic about — this shift. No transition will be possible if local communities are not fully engaged in these changes. |
| --- | --- |

1.10.

| 1.11. | The EESC calls on the Commission to rethink the way it consults the public, to enable any individual or business to take part in consultations without first requiring them to be included on the transparency register. The EESC considers social dialogue to be the most important way of finding specific solutions with the social partners in the ORs. It calls for greater, wider use of such solutions. Civil society must be genuinely involved in shaping European programmes and this must be done in direct cooperation with local and regional stakeholders. The level of actual involvement of social partners and civil society organisations in the implementation and evaluation phases of recovery and resilience plans for ORs must be strengthened. It is essential to establish a contact point at the European Commission that civil society can tap directly. |
| --- | --- |

1.11.

| 1.12. | The EESC calls on the Commission to establish a pact for skills in the ORs, as it has done for several industrial ecosystems. |
| --- | --- |

1.12.

| 1.12.1. | The green transition of ORs can only succeed if these regions have the skilled workforce they need to stay competitive. Education and training are central to raising awareness and boosting skills for the green economy in this area in the instruments such as the green strand in Erasmus+ and the Education for Climate Coalition. With the European Skills Agenda for sustainable competitiveness, social fairness and resilience, the Commission is rolling out flagship actions to equip people with the right skills needed for the green and digital transition. Under the Agenda, the Commission also facilitates the development of commitments for re- and upskilling in all industrial ecosystems. The ORs must be fully integrated into these Commission flagship actions through the establishment of a specific work programme. |
| --- | --- |

1.12.1.

| 1.12.2. | The EESC calls on the Commission to step up efforts to reduce inequalities in the ORs, as the COVID-19 pandemic has affected endeavours to reduce these inequalities. The ORs are considered to be regions riven by ongoing inequalities. The interpretations of the concepts of ‘centre’ and ‘periphery’ provide some explanation of the distribution of wealth in an economy where relations are often unbalanced. Strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion is one of the EU’s main aims. |
| --- | --- |

1.12.2.

| 1.13. | The EESC calls on the Commission to ensure that the recovery process respects social needs, while remaining uniform and balanced at regional level. It stresses the need to assess a region as a whole in order to find tailor-made solutions. |
| --- | --- |

1.13.

| 1.13.1. | The EESC calls on the Commission to take measures to ensure digital access in the ORs. More than elsewhere, the inability to ensure reliable access to digital technology across the board and use the associated resources effectively accentuates inequalities. However, the pre-existing digital divides have widened and the pandemic has exacerbated certain disparities, leaving some people behind while digitalisation is gathering pace. Employment, education, health and public services will certainly become increasingly dependent on digital technologies. |
| --- | --- |

1.13.1.

| 1.13.2. | The EESC calls on the Commission to make sustained efforts in the field of research and innovation, which are essential to capitalise on all the opportunities offered by the ORs’ specific characteristics in the area of oceans, seas and marine resources and which must be prioritised, as they have great potential to boost economies, create high-quality jobs and ensure people’s well-being. This concerns a wide variety of businesses of all sizes. It is crucial both in order to develop traditional activities and to create new market opportunities, which would also help attract young people. |
| --- | --- |

1.13.2.

| 1.14. | The EESC calls on the Commission to launch a major water and sanitation access project in the upcoming ORs’ operational programmes. These major projects should be directly managed by the European Commission. Major projects mobilise large-scale investments with a unit value of more than EUR 50 million and are supported by EU cohesion policy funds. They directly benefit Member States and their citizens by creating better infrastructures and new jobs, establishing a healthier environment and opening up new business opportunities. |
| --- | --- |

1.14.

| 1.14.1. | In the French ORs, people do not have access to drinking water and the sanitation system is often inadequate. Access to drinking water and sanitation is inextricably linked to the right to life and human dignity and to the need for an adequate standard of living. |
| --- | --- |

1.14.1.

| 1.15. | The EESC calls on the Commission to update its communication on the analyses carried out on the situation of the ORs owing to immigration. It calls for interregional cooperation on migration and for the new EU Pact on Migration to be applied to these regions, permitting a ‘mechanism of mandatory solidarity’ to be implemented due to ‘migratory pressure’. |
| --- | --- |

1.15.

2.   General comments

| 2.1. | The ORs, which are located in a number of geographical areas, give Europe a geostrategic, economic and cultural position alongside several continents and provide it with unique benefits. These benefits have intrinsic added value and underpin EU cooperation with third countries, even outside their geographical areas. They contribute to Europe’s international influence and offer unique potential for implementing solutions to the challenges facing the EU. The European Commission has announced that a new communication will be adopted, under the French Presidency of the Council, updating the Commission’s strategic partnership with these regions. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | Making the most of the benefits identified depends, to a large extent, on the EU’s ability to engage with all of its people. Civil society must help raise awareness among the various stakeholders (states, regions, local authorities, local communities, schools, businesses and individuals) about the value of recognising that the ORs can promote spin-offs from tangible operational actions in order to speed up implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals. Impact would be measured in a number of fields (fisheries, agriculture and changing models; culture and promotion of the sector; employment and training; education and youth mobility; business development; environment, energy and climate challenges; immigration). |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | The EESC’s proposals for reconstruction and recovery following the COVID-19 pandemic determine the framework within which the ORs’ assets must flourish. They can reflect how these regions contribute in various areas: pursuing the necessary structural changes and related investment activities, mainly with regard to digitalisation, smart and social innovation and the green transition; continuously improving competitiveness; creating the right environment to consolidate the place of work as one of the main drivers of economic recovery; creating the conditions for greater self-sufficiency and resilience; substantially improving distribution chains. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | The EU Water Framework Directive recognises that ‘water is not a commercial product like any other but, rather, a heritage which must be protected, defended and treated as such’. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

| 2.4.1. | In order to secure and improve access to water and sanitation, three elements are crucial: quality, physical accessibility and affordability. The EU has contributed to ensuring access to safe drinking water and sanitation for the population of its Member States through two main types of actions. Firstly, it has established ambitious water quality standards, guaranteeing a high level of protection for both public health and the environment. Secondly, the EU has provided financial support to expand and improve water infrastructures in the Member States, thus helping to increase both quality and physical access to water-related services. Currently, the French ORs have yet to feel the effects of EU intervention, and the population has no access to water. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.1.

3.   Specific comments

3.1.   A context revealing food and energy priorities

| 3.1.1. | The ORs are considered to be economically vulnerable regions. Some vulnerabilities are due to their exposure to risks arising from structural variables (such as remoteness, market size, concentration of exports and the share of agriculture and fisheries in wealth creation) while others are linked to their exposure to shocks caused by exceptional situations (such as economic, environmental, social and health crises). The COVID-19 pandemic has raised awareness about the potential consequences of inadequate preparedness. Distribution and supply chains may have withstood this crisis, but there will never be a vaccine able to protect people from the effects of food and energy fragility. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.1.

| 3.1.2. | The ORs must show that they are able to meet basic food and energy needs in order to make their populations resilient to external shocks. This is an approach which, while creating local jobs and social ties, aims to involve committed individuals in monitoring innovative projects on the ground, supported by efficient and attentive public bodies. The ORs have what is needed for a transition that brings economic activity and social cohesion. There is a strong cultural basis for a relationship with nature conducive to the emergence of ecosystems favouring healthy and sustainable food production. Similarly, ready access to the most common renewable energies (hydraulic, biomass, wind, thermal, geothermal and photovoltaic) opens up a range of possibilities. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.2.

| 3.1.3. | The EU will be adopting a new climate policy cycle — the Fit for 55 package. The ORs can become test-beds for making the European Union more resilient. The Farm to Fork Strategy is a central element of the European Green Deal. The ORs have the means to demonstrate the urgent need to preserve a rich biodiversity, to strengthen the position of farmers and fishers in the value chain, to encourage sustainable food consumption and to promote healthy food at affordable prices for all, without compromising on food safety, quality or price. The ORs can be the incubators of this EU strategy, which aims to encompass the entire food chain. They can provide effective clarification on the need for timely impact assessments. The energy crisis in the ORs is already critical. This is why specific solutions from all angles need to be found for these regions, since they could be among the worst hit if this energy crisis worsens. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.3.

| 3.1.4. | In the ORs, as in all of Europe’s regions, the energy transition is not only a matter of technology. It is a major social issue, in which civil society must be involved. In this respect, the recovery following the COVID-19 pandemic provides an opportunity to use funds to achieve the aim of placing people at the heart of the energy transition and thereby boosting the regional economy. Renewable energies, which are widely available in the ORs, are decentralised. They require relatively little investment compared to the costs incurred by centralised large-scale structures. With the Green Deal, the Commission has made climate neutrality its top priority and with the Recovery Plan, it plans to invest billions of euros in reconstructing the economy and in creating and safeguarding high-quality jobs in Europe. The ORs can pave the way for a people-centred approach that takes into account the most vulnerable consumers. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.4.

| 3.1.5. | The EU Water Framework Directive recognises that ‘water is not a commercial product like any other but, rather, a heritage which must be protected, defended and treated as such’. In order to secure and improve access to water and sanitation, three elements are crucial: quality, physical accessibility and affordability. The EU has contributed to ensuring access to safe drinking water and sanitation for the population of its Member States through two main types of actions. Firstly, the EU has established ambitious water quality standards, guaranteeing a high level of protection for both public health and the environment. Secondly, the EU has provided financial support to expand and improve water infrastructures in the Member States, thus helping to increase both quality and physical access to water-related services. Currently, some French ORs have yet to feel the effects of EU intervention, since the difficulties faced by the population in terms of access to water are unique in Europe. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.5.

3.2.   Widening divides and forms of inequality

| 3.2.1. | The ORs are considered to be regions riven by persistent inequality. Interpretations of the concept of ‘centre’ and ‘periphery’ provide a number of explanations for the distribution of wealth in an economy where relationships are often imbalanced. Strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion is one of the EU’s main aims. A significant budget is devoted to reducing disparities, and the ORs benefit from this. While evaluation tools are not perfect, it should be recognised that the COVID-19 pandemic has affected efforts to reduce this inequality. The Conference of Presidents of the ORs on 19 November 2021 also made a statement about these consequences. Social partners and all civil society organisations need to sound the alarm regarding the need to speed up all efforts to put an end to approaches based on catching up, to place people at the centre of tools and measures and to start looking ahead. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.1.

| 3.2.2. | Sound economic bases are key to promoting sustainable development and maintaining an ambitious social model in the ORs. Social policies need to go hand in hand with policies that boost economic development, recognising that all of them serve the common good. Creating jobs, developing skills and making labour markets inclusive are the only vaccines against inequality and exclusion, and which make society more stable. The recovery process therefore has to respect social needs, while remaining regionally even and balanced. We need to look at the regional area as a whole in order to come up with tailor-made solutions. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.2.

| 3.2.3. | Since March 2020, all regions have engaged in a huge shift towards cyberspace. In the ORs, as elsewhere, schoolchildren have started remote learning, employees have implemented teleworking and companies have sought to change their business models in order to continue to operate. However, pre-existing digital divides have widened and the pandemic has exacerbated some disparities, leaving some people behind as digitalisation picks up the pace. Going back to the way things used to be is not a realistic option and jobs, education, health and public services will certainly become increasingly dependent on digital technologies. In the ORs, more than elsewhere, the inability to ensure widespread and reliable access to digital technology and the efficient use of the associated resources is exacerbating inequality. There is an urgent need to provide access to satellite broadband internet in the ORs, to give people access to digital technologies. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.3.

| 3.2.4. | In the ORs, activities related to oceans, seas and marine resources should be prioritised, as they have great potential to boost economies, create high-quality jobs and ensure people’s well-being. This concerns a wide variety of companies of all sizes. Sustained efforts in the field of research and innovation are essential in order to capitalise on all the opportunities arising from the ORs’ specific characteristics. This is paramount both to develop traditional activities and to create new market opportunities, which would also help attract young people. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.4.

3.3.   The urgent need to step up the involvement of civil society

| 3.3.1. | Several pilot projects in the ORs are supported by European programmes (Erasmus+, H2020, etc.). The updating of the Commission’s strategic partnership with these regions should provide an opportunity to step up this support and replicate these projects. The aim will be to promote projects for energy autonomy, food autonomy, sustainable tourism, children’s education, adult learning and social inclusion. Digitalisation must be a prerequisite for the development of OR economies. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.1.

| 3.3.2. | Given the major impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on societies in the ORs, the EESC calls for the implementation of economic and social projects geared towards prosperity, giving priority to people’s wellbeing and leaving no one behind. A major challenge for these regions is establishing how to remedy forms of inequality and imbalance. The crisis has highlighted and deepened long-standing divides in these societies, especially in terms of access to healthcare and education. The incidence of COVID-19 infections appears to have been higher among the most deprived. The poorest people are also less likely to be able to telework. In the recovery process, ORs can become test-beds for filling gaps in social, economic and environmental policies. In these regions, European funds must be more than figures, targets and deadlines: they should also symbolise a common vision of the future and a genuine interest in the European project. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.2.

| 3.3.3. | The implementation of recovery plans in the ORs should make it possible to experiment with new practices for monitoring the allocation of funds and resources. Partnerships can include the obligation to set up monitoring committees representing a wide range of stakeholders from civil society organisations. Considering the ORs’ benefits for the EU provides an opportunity to call for a broad consensus between political parties, social stakeholders, entrepreneurs, trade unions and civil society, with a view to ensuring the greatest possible success of these regions in the EU. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.3.

| 3.4. | In the ORs, the scale of the challenges created by the COVID-19 pandemic, and by the expected transitions, requires the active cooperation of all actors representing civil society, within the scope of their individual responsibilities and competences. Social dialogue is a decisive tool for the implementation of recovery plans in the ORs. It should make it possible to experiment with new ways of monitoring the allocation of funds and resources. Partnerships can include the obligation to set up monitoring committees representing a wide range of stakeholders, including the social partners, given their critical role, as well as other civil society organisations. Considering the benefits of the ORs for the EU is an opportunity to call for a broad consensus, to ensure that these EU regions are as successful as possible. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.

| 3.5. | The ORs are fully susceptible to the demands of globalisation, characterised mainly by the increasing connection of regions, cultures and economies. They represent EU borders that are far from the mainland. The management of migration flows and border protection remains a major challenge for these regions. This leads to vulnerable situations, made worse by the pandemic crisis. Through its communication of 12 September 2007 entitled ‘Strategy for the Outermost Regions: Achievements and Future Prospects’, the European Commission decided to focus on the situation of the outermost regions (OR) in relation to immigration. The analysis revealed a rather complex mix of levels of public action in these regions. The diversity of migration patterns complicates the development of common approaches to migration across these regions. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.

Brussels, 20 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

1

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/50

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

(exploratory opinion requested by the French presidency)

(2022/C 194/09)

| Rapporteur: | Franca SALIS-MADINIER |
| --- | --- |

Rapporteur:

Franca SALIS-MADINIER

| Request by the French presidency of the Council | Letter of 21.9.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship |
| Adopted in section | 16.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 20.01.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 172/32/70 |

Request by the French presidency of the Council

Letter of 21.9.2021

Legal basis

Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship

Adopted in section

16.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

20.01.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

172/32/70

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | The EESC shares the view of the Commission in its 2021-2027 strategy on occupational safety and health (OSH), and sees social dialogue (SD) as instrumental in achieving the three key objectives: anticipating and managing change in the world of work brought about by the green, digital and demographic transitions; improving prevention of workplace accidents and work-related illnesses; and being prepared for any potential future health crises. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | The pandemic is an opportunity to create a new collective ability to tackle future crises and mitigate their impact on OSH. The recovery plan should make it possible to strengthen the role of the social partners in the Member States where they have the least influence. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | The EESC recommends a comprehensive and integrated forward-looking analysis of the impact of the digital transition on labour market in order to anticipate the upheavals it will entail and develop a long-term OSH strategy. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | The 2002 European Framework Agreement is not suited to meeting the new challenges posed by teleworking. The EESC recommends that new guidelines be drawn up, with a particular focus on preventing psychosocial risks (PSR) and musculo-skeletal disorders (MSDs). |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | The EESC invites the labour inspectorates to perform inspection of teleworking conditions, at the employee’s request and with due regard to privacy in accordance with the national rules. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | The EESC recommends that the cost of work-related illnesses such as heart disease and burnout be thoroughly monitored in order to pinpoint appropriate measures at the appropriate level in line with Vision Zero. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | The EESC calls for a culture of prevention to be developed; this should involve training the parties involved in the SD, raising awareness of emerging risks and bolstering and disseminating the resources available. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

| 1.8. | The EESC considers that, under Article 155(2) TFEU, agreements between the social partners shall be implemented in the Member States. The EESC asks the Commission to discuss with the social partners the implementation of autonomous agreements and the process of joint request for Council decision, respecting the autonomy of social partners and following the procedure of article 155 TFEU. |
| --- | --- |

1.8.

| 1.9. | The EESC encourages the development of benchmarks and ready-to-use risk assessment tools, which are particularly useful for very small and medium-sized enterprises. SMEs need the right guidance, training and financial support to comply with OSH obligations. |
| --- | --- |

1.9.

| 1.10. | The EESC calls for a system to be put in place to assess the impact of the legislative initiatives, collective agreements and European action plans in this area, and reiterates its recommendation (1) of one labour inspector for every 10 000 workers. |
| --- | --- |

1.10.

| 1.11. | The EESC calls for a more proactive Vision Zero campaign, focused on prevention and the elimination of risk, in line with the Framework Directive. |
| --- | --- |

1.11.

| 1.12. | With regard to combating work-related cancer, the EESC calls for a more ambitious position covering the 50 priority carcinogens, as well as reprotoxic substances and hazardous medicinal products, and including stress (2) and shift work (3). |
| --- | --- |

1.12.

| 1.13. | The EESC calls for EU legislation on PSR. An effective preventive approach requires action to be taken with regard to the working environment rather than focusing solely on the mental health of the individual. |
| --- | --- |

1.13.

| 1.14. | The EESC considers that the development of a comprehensive, long-term and integrated prevention policy requires the reactivation of the draft MSD Directive. |
| --- | --- |

1.14.

| 1.15. | The EESC calls for the Artificial Intelligence Act (4) to be amended. The EESC recommends making third party conformity assessments obligatory for all high-risk AI. |
| --- | --- |

1.15.

| 1.16. | The EESC calls for platform workers to be included in the scope of the strategic framework. The right to organise, be represented and to engage in collective bargaining should be guaranteed, and social protection rights extended to these workers. |
| --- | --- |

1.16.

2.   Background

| 2.1. | Ahead of its forthcoming EU presidency, France has asked the Committee to draw up this opinion to explore the issue of the effectiveness of SD (5) as a tool to promote OSH. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | The Commission has proposed a new strategic framework on OSH, which sets the following three key objectives: anticipating and managing change in the world of work brought about by the green, digital and demographic transitions; improving prevention of workplace accidents and work-related illnesses; and being prepared for any potential future health crises (6). The Commission is putting a particular emphasis on SD in terms of achieving these three objectives. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | The strategic framework has adopted the ‘Vision Zero’ approach, aimed at eliminating work-related deaths in the EU, and puts a focus on gender equality in OSH. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | Combating work-related cancer is set as a priority. The framework also includes a commitment from the Commission to establishing binding occupational exposure limits for additional carcinogens. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

3.   General comments

3.1.   Social dialogue as an essential tool in risk prevention

| 3.1.1. | Bipartite negotiations between the European social partners are of paramount importance when it comes to tackling OSH problems. However, the application of autonomous agreements is sometimes uneven, varying in line with the relative strength of the SD and the diversity of the industrial relations systems in the Member States (7). Agreements leading to Council directives following a request from both signatory parties seem more effective as they ensure specific action plans in the Member States. The EESC asks the Commission to discuss with the social partners better implementation of autonomous agreements and the process of joint request for Council decisions, respecting the autonomy of social partners and following the procedure of Article 155 TFEU. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.1.

| 3.1.2. | Both at cross-industry level (work-related stress (8), and workplace violence and harassment (9)) and at sectoral level (MSDs in agriculture (10), health protection in hairdressing salons (11), crystalline silica in the chemicals sector and mining (12), the prevention of sharp injuries in hospitals (13)), European SD has delivered improvements to workers’ working conditions. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.2.

| 3.1.3. | Sectoral agreements setting minimum standards or establishing general guidelines on OSH are particularly important for SMEs, as SMEs do not always have the resources to come up with plans for improving working conditions. SMEs need advice, training and financial support in order to implement them. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.3.

| 3.1.4. | SD is an invaluable tool for businesses and for society as a whole. OSH measures carried out through SD contribute positively to workers health, can improve the profitability of businesses, and reduces healthcare costs and absenteeism (14). The cost to society of work-related injury and illness is estimated at 3,3 % (15) of EU GDP (EUR 476 bn), amounting to more than half of the recovery plan funds. This percentage varies widely between Member States, depending on the industrial landscape, the legislative context and the prevention measures in place. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.4.

| 3.1.5. | In the emergency phase of the crisis, the measures taken by authorities had major sectoral impacts: the closure of schools, shops, etc. Many businesses feared going under, particularly in the hospitality and cultural sectors (16). |
| --- | --- |

3.1.5.

| 3.1.6. | The negotiations that took place successfully ensured business continuity and the survival of the European economy. In sectors such as transport, business and agriculture, the European social partners played a vital role when it came to the measures that needed to be taken to adapt to the situation, the temporary shutdowns, and even closures, and the impact on employment. Lessons will have to be learned with a view to possible future crises. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.6.

| 3.1.7. | The results achieved should not conceal important shortcomings. The quality of national SD mechanisms is uneven (17). In many Member States, measures were adopted without the timely and meaningful consultation of the national social partners. Some governments adopted emergency measures restricting their autonomy, as though they were a hindrance rather than a source of solutions. The health crisis has revealed a need to better manage and coordinate the necessary measures taken in the Member States. A strengthened dialogue between Member States, European institutions as well as national and European social partners is necessary to provide solutions in managing the crisis. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.7.

| 3.1.8. | The EESC notes that the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU of September 2021 stated that the Commission is not obliged to act on the social partners’ requests to implement the agreements concluded and calls on the Commission to establish clear criteria for the implementation of the agreements signed by the social partners (18). The EESC considers that, under Article 155(2) TFEU, agreements between the social partners should be implemented in the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.8.

3.2.   Specific comments

3.2.1.   The digital and climate transitions and new vulnerabilities

| 3.2.1.1. | The European Central Bank has highlighted the macroeconomic and financial risks (19) entailed in global warming (economic losses caused by rising sea levels and changing precipitation patterns) and in the green transition (rising stranded assets, rising structural unemployment, price volatility and inflation). |
| --- | --- |

3.2.1.1.

| 3.2.1.2. | Robotisation, AI, and the development of new business models, forms of subcontracting and remote work will have a long-term impact on the labour market, as well as on up-skilling, work organisation, workstation design, and occupational risks and the ways of preventing them. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.1.2.

| 3.2.1.3. | Although open-ended contracts remain the benchmark, we are seeing an increase in flexible or non-standard forms of employment, such as on-call and platform work. Because they have little influence on the way they work, workers in such forms of employment generally have to contend with poor working conditions (uncomfortable posture, excessive work rate, severe work pressure, lack of autonomy and little variety in their tasks) (20). |
| --- | --- |

3.2.1.3.

| 3.2.1.4. | These transitions will lead to a shift in occupational risks. Firstly, to the margins of the workforce, through the combined development of subcontracting and precarious contracts, which are less protective in terms of OSH. Then towards new vulnerabilities linked to working conditions, through the hybridisation of flexible forms of organisation and new forms of the old Taylorist practices. And finally towards new work-related problems, reflected in the endemic rise in occupational stress and related illnesses. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.1.4.

3.3.   The challenges for OSH in the digital ecosystem

| 3.3.1. | Information and communication technologies are gradually shaping a new digital ecosystem, with teleworking at its centre. The wholesale shift to teleworking is meeting a need: 80 % (21) of employers and 76 % of European workers want to continue teleworking beyond the crisis. While providing greater flexibility, teleworking poses new challenges: inadequate equipment, a sense of isolation, difficulties in disconnecting psychologically from work and a lack of support from management. Some 25 % (22) of workers say that they are constantly emotionally exhausted from their work on a regular basis — a core feature of burnout. Teleworking has also meant new challenges to employers regarding e.g. increased telework equipment purchases, challenges of remote work management and organisation. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.1.

| 3.3.2. | Progress in different areas of robotics is leading to a shift from working on actual production to monitoring automated processes. It is estimated that 22 % of jobs in the EU could be automated by 2030, amounting to 53 million jobs (23). Automation can either improve working conditions (job safety and ergonomics, making the job more interesting, eliminating arduous and dangerous tasks). Naturally, it is also important to monitor and prevent any possible OSH risks following from these developments which might, if they are solely finalised to productivity, lead to their deterioration of working conditions. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.2.

| 3.3.3. | Many of the advances brought about by AI are still at an embryonic stage, such as algorithmic management in the platform economy and in some logistics giants. There are two issues here: taking over the tasks of the supervisor in terms of performance oversight and monitoring, and increasing productivity by streamlining work, which is sometimes taken to the extreme. According to scientific studies on which the European Trade Union Institute made a comprehensive summary, in terms of OSH, these practices mean that on top of the ‘traditional’ risks linked to streamlining (more intense and onerous work, hollowed-out jobs) we have the ‘emerging’ risks associated with digitalisation (mental overload, hyper-connectedness, social isolation) (24). |
| --- | --- |

3.3.3.

| 3.3.4. | Algorithmic management is gradually taking hold in companies, where it helps address the challenges posed by remote working. Constant monitoring and evaluation are posing a risk to the mental health of workers (25), in particular through the Big Brother effect and the removal of the boundaries between home life and work. Without the necessary safeguards, these technologies can undermine the fundamental rights of privacy and dignity. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.4.

| 3.3.5. | In its proposal for an Artificial Intelligence Act (26), the Commission does not tackle head-on the challenges posed by high-risk applications in the workplace. The EESC has recommended making third party conformity assessments obligatory for all high-risk AI (27). Systems that assess workers’ behaviour, working time and performance and detect their emotions, when qualifying as high-risk AI, should be subject to third-party conformity assessments. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.5.

3.4.   Transformations, transitions and ‘new problems’

| 3.4.1. | We are seeing a shift from a rise in occupational injuries to a rise in occupational illnesses. Between 2000 and 2016, deaths from heart disease and stroke associated with exposure to long working hours increased by 41 % and 19 % respectively worldwide (28). Work-related psychological conditions are also on the rise like depressive disorders. Some 17-35 % of cases of depression can be attributed to work (29), which points to an upward trend in PSR and their impact on workers’ health. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.1.

| 3.4.2. | This shift in work-related problems can also be seen in physical risk factors. The incidence of workplace accidents is falling slightly (30), while MSDs remain the leading cause of unfitness for work worldwide (31). The latest ESENER survey shows that repetitive hand or arm movements and prolonged sitting are the two risk factors to which workers are most exposed (32). Thus, it is no longer so much isolated exposure to highly dangerous situations that threatens OSH, but the prolonged exposure to lower-level risk factors. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.2.

4.   Opportunities to improve the effectiveness of SD and mitigate OSH risks

| 4.1. | The pandemic is an opportunity to create a new collective ability to tackle health, environmental and demographic crises. The social partners are best placed to anticipate change, anticipate new training needs, adapt to new environments, identify emerging risks (33), and prepare for the transformation in production processes. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.

| 4.2. | It is important to ensure that the agreements reached through SD are being properly implemented. The EESC reiterates its support (34) for the ILO recommendation (35) of one labour inspector per 10 000 workers and stresses the need to strengthen the role of trade union representatives in OSH. At all levels, the social partners must be sufficiently involved in the design and implementation of the preventive measures, in accordance with the Framework Directive. |
| --- | --- |

4.2.

| 4.3. | With the wholesale shift to teleworking, there is a need to extend the remit of labour inspectorates. As is the case in Spain (36), inspectors should be able to carry out checks on the conditions under which teleworking is carried out, at the employee’s request and with due regard to privacy. This should include recording complaints about not being properly equipped, non-compliance with the right to disconnect, etc. |
| --- | --- |

4.3.

| 4.4. | The EESC recommends carrying out a forward-looking analysis of the impact of digitalisation on the world of work in the Member States, and in particular on up-skilling, work organisation, and occupational risks and the ways of preventing them. |
| --- | --- |

4.4.

| 4.5. | The increasing cost of work-related illnesses such as heart disease and burnout should be thoroughly monitored in order to pinpoint appropriate measures at the appropriate level in line with the Vision Zero (deaths) approach. |
| --- | --- |

4.5.

| 4.6. | The current arrangements do not allow for a rigorous assessment of the impact of the autonomous framework agreements. The data available are patchy and the protocols make it impossible to establish a causal link. There needs to be investment in the development of indicators specific to each agreement and in a longitudinal system for establishing cause and effect while fully respecting the autonomy of social partners in the implementation of framework agreements. |
| --- | --- |

4.6.

| 4.7. | These specific indicators would be complemented by broader indicators enabling progress made on OSH to be tracked. The ESENER surveys could fulfil this role; the EESC recommends that they be conducted more regularly and that they cover OSH challenges more systematically. This will make it possible to assess the coverage of the initiatives deployed and to propose new measures if necessary. |
| --- | --- |

4.7.

| 4.8. | Through the Senior Labour Inspectors Committee, the European Labour Authority (37) could play its oversight role through providing opportunities and recommendations for exchanging best practices and support capacity building on the enforcement of the legislation and on the implementation of SD agreements not converted into directives. |
| --- | --- |

4.8.

| 4.9. | A proper joined-up approach to European and national SD will require greater involvement of the social partners in all Member States. Funds could be mobilised for building the capacity of the social partners where this is weak. |
| --- | --- |

4.9.

| 4.10. | The EESC encourages any initiative to assist SMEs in their prevention efforts. Examples here include the recent ISO 45003 standard (38) on PSR, the OiRA project (Online interactive Risk Assessment), to which new modules are regularly added, and the Healthy Workplaces portal, which brings resources together in one place for employers. In France, OiRA has been used 61 000 times (39) by 42 000 users, accounting for half of its users. The EESC emphasises the value of these ready-to-use tools for businesses that do not have the necessary resources internally, and points out that risk assessment is an essential pillar of prevention. |
| --- | --- |

4.10.

| 4.11. | The Vision Zero approach should be more proactive by focusing on risk elimination, in line with the Framework Directive. All OSH policies should adhere to the principle of prevention, be developed and implemented through SD, and be supported by robust rules. |
| --- | --- |

4.11.

| 4.12. | With regard to combating work-related cancer, the EESC calls for a more ambitious position covering the 50 priority carcinogens. The scope of Directive 2004/37/EC should also be expanded to reprotoxic substances and hazardous medicinal products (40). In addition, chronic stress increases the risk of developing cancer (41), and night-time shift work can be a cause of breast cancer, prostate cancer and bowel cancer (42). A risk-based approach is needed, not a methodology that sees worker protection as a cost. |
| --- | --- |

4.12.

| 4.13. | MSDs remain the biggest OSH problem in the EU. At company level, prevention will only be effective if there is high-quality SD and a well-functioning health and safety committee (where these exist). SD at sectoral level can also play its part, through specific guidelines, awareness-raising and the exchange of experience, and the dissemination of good practices. At European level, the development of a comprehensive, long-term and integrated policy requires the reactivation of the draft MSD Directive. |
| --- | --- |

4.13.

| 4.14. | The incomplete implementation of the 2004 autonomous framework agreement on work-related stress underlines the need for European PSR legislation. The EESC points out that an effective preventive approach requires action to be taken on the factors involved — namely the organisation of work. An approach focused on the mental health of the individual will not reduce work-related stress. |
| --- | --- |

4.14.

| 4.15. | The EESC stresses that both a strong regulatory framework and productive SD are needed. The directives set the general OSH guidelines, while the different levels of SD enable the necessary tailoring to specific sectoral and national circumstances. |
| --- | --- |

4.15.

| 4.16. | The EESC is disappointed that self-employed workers have been excluded from the scope of the strategic framework. Some so-called self-employed platform workers are in fact subject to an employer-employee relationship with the platform via algorithmic management. The pandemic has highlighted the vulnerability of these workers and the shortcomings of platforms in terms of prevention. The exposure of these workers to uncontrolled risks, as a result of their exclusion from the strategic framework, is a situation that should not continue. |
| --- | --- |

4.16.

| 4.17. | The EESC stresses the asymmetric relationships between the platforms and these workers, and points out that freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining are fundamental rights. Proper organisation and representation are vital in order to facilitate SD and collective bargaining. Moreover, social protection rights should be extended to these workers. |
| --- | --- |

4.17.

| 4.18. | It is equally important to give attention to workers with disabilities and chronic diseases. Employment opens the door to decent housing, a fulfilling social and cultural life and integration in society. If the EU’s inclusion objectives are to be achieved, the disparities between Member States should be reduced and policies on employability and economic, social and cultural inclusion standardised. |
| --- | --- |

4.18.

| 4.19. | Preventing professional exclusion should be covered by SD and be part of the return to employment (workstation adaptation, returning to work part-time, etc.). Measures to raise awareness of the situation of workers with disabilities and workers potentially at risk of exclusion due to unfitness are recommended. |
| --- | --- |

4.19.

| 4.20. | Recognising diversity, including gender differences, in the workforce is vital in ensuring the safety and health of both men and women workers. Whilst some progress has been made in this area, the EESC believes more can and should be done. Gender differences should be considered in the development of OSH policies and prevention strategies. The EESC calls for a gender sensitive approach to OSH to mainstream gender into all areas of OSH. To reap the benefits from the social dialogue, the EESC stresses the importance that women participate equally in the social dialogue. |
| --- | --- |

4.20.

| 4.21. | Access to information technology should be made easier for young workers. Lifelong learning is becoming the main source of job security in the digital age. It is also important to include older workers by promoting learning opportunities and protection against age discrimination. |
| --- | --- |

4.21.

| 4.22. | The benefits of teleworking depend on how it is organised by the employer. Teleworking should be regulated by collective bargaining in order to prevent the difficulties that have been identified in numerous surveys (43). The European Framework Agreement signed in 2002 is not suited to meeting these new challenges. The EESC recommends that new guidelines be drawn up, with a particular focus on PSR and MSDs. |
| --- | --- |

4.22.

| 4.23. | The links between OSH and business profitability should be highlighted. Because of its effects on working conditions and keeping people at work, SD makes it possible to prevent costs arising from workplace accidents and work-related illnesses. This is an investment whereby the benefits outweigh the costs involved (44). |
| --- | --- |

4.23.

| 4.24. | A culture of prevention should be developed; this should involve training the various parties involved in the SD, raising awareness of emerging risks and bolstering and disseminating the resources available. The EESC calls for funds from the recovery plan to be deployed for this purpose. |
| --- | --- |

4.24.

Brussels, 20 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  OJ C 105, 4.3.2022, p. 114.

1

(2)  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7466429/.

2

(3)  https://www.cancer-environnement.fr/597-Vol-124--Cancerogenicite-du-travail-de-nuit-poste.ce.aspx

3

(4)  European Commission (2021), Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and amending certain Union legislative acts, COM(2021) 206 final

4

(5)  European social dialogue refers to discussions, consultations, negotiations and joint actions involving organisations representing the social partners (employers and workers). A distinction should be made between tripartite dialogue with public authorities and bipartite dialogue between European trade unions and employers.

5

(6)  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021DC0323&qid=1626089672913#PP1Contents

6

(7)  https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2021/right-to-disconnect-exploring-company-practices

7

(8)  https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=521&langId=en&agreementId=1106

8

(9)  https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=521&langId=en&agreementId=5000

9

(10)  https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=521&langId=en&agreementId=1202

10

(11)  https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=521&langId=en&agreementId=5460

11

(12)  https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=521&langId=en&agreementId=1348

12

(13)  https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=521&langId=en&agreementId=5595

13

(14)  https://osha.europa.eu/en/themes/good-osh-is-good-for-business

14

(15)  https://visualisation.osha.europa.eu/osh-costs#!/.

15

(16)  See OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 159, point 2.3.

16

(17)  Involvement of social partners in policymaking during the COVID-19 outbreak, European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound)(2021), Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

17

(18)  OJ C 10, 11.1.2021, p. 14.

18

(19)  ECB (2021), Climate change and monetary policy in the euro area, Occasional Paper Series, No 271/September 2021.

19

(20)  Bérastégui P. (2021), Exposure to Psychosocial Risk Factors in the Gig Economy: A Systematic Review. ETUI Research Report 2021.01.

20

(21)  Littler Mendelson (2020), Littler European Employer COVID-19 Survey Report

21

(22)  Eurofound (2020), Living, working and COVID-19, COVID-19 series, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

22

(23)  https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/future-of-work/the-future-of-work-in-europe

23

(24)  Bérastégui P. (2021), Exposure to Psychosocial Risk Factors in the Gig Economy: A Systematic Review. ETUI Research Report 2021.01.

24

(25)  APPG (2021), The new frontier: Artificial Intelligence at work.

25

(26)  European Commission (2021), Proposal for a Regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) (COM(2021) 206 final).

26

(27)  OJ C 517, 22.12.2021, p. 61, point 1.10.

27

(28)  ILO (2021) WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury, 2000–2016.

28

(29)  Niedhammer et al. (2021). Update of the fractions of cardiovascular diseases and mental disorders attributable to psychosocial work factors in Europe. Int Arch Occup Environ Health.

29

(30)  https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/ddn-20211012-2.

30

(31)  Cieza et al. (2020). Global estimates of the need for rehabilitation based on the Global Burden of Disease study 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. The Lancet, 396: 10267.

31

(32)  EU-OSHA (2020) European Survey of Enterprises on New and Emerging Risks (ESENER 2019) — background briefing.

32

(33)  https://osha.europa.eu/en/emerging-risks.

33

(34)  OJ C 105, 4.3.2022, p. 114.

34

(35)  https://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb297/pdf/esp-3.pdf

35

(36)  https://ec.europa.eu/social/ajax/BlobServlet?docId=23324&langId=en

36

(37)  The purpose of the European Labour Authority is to support compliance and coordination between Member States in the enforcement of EU legal acts in the areas of labour mobility and coordination of social security systems.

37

(38)  https://www.iso.org/standard/64283.html

38

(39)  https://oiraproject.eu/en/news/road-transport-france-now-safer-oira

39

(40)  A chemical which may impair the fertility of a man or woman or impair the development of an unborn child.

40

(41)  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7466429/

41

(42)  https://www.cancer-environnement.fr/597-Vol-124--Cancerogenicite-du-travail-de-nuit-poste.ce.aspx.

42

(43)  https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/data/covid-19/working-teleworking.

43

(44)  https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---travail/documents/publication/wcms_571914.pdf

44

---

ANNEX

The following amendments, which received at least a quarter of the votes cast, were rejected during the discussions (Rule 59(3) of the Rules of Procedure):

AMENDMENT 2

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 3.2.1.3

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Although open-ended contracts remain the benchmark, we are seeing an increase in flexible or non-standard forms of employment, such as on-call and platform work.
  Because they have little influence on the way they work
  ,
  workers in
  such
  forms of employment generally have
  to
  contend with poor working conditions (uncomfortable posture, excessive
  work
  rate
  ,
  severe work pressure
  ,
  lack
  of
  autonomy
  and
  little variety in their tasks)

   (1). | Although open-ended contracts remain the benchmark, we are seeing an increase in flexible or non-standard forms of employment, such as on-call and platform work.
  Teleworking carries some risks
  , such
  as possible challenges related
  to
  : the worker becoming invisible in the
  work
  community; missing out on formal and informal support structures
  ,
  personal contacts with colleagues and access to information
  ,
  promotion and training opportunities; possible worsening
  of
  gender inequalities
  and
  increased risk of violence and harassment

   (1)

  , which shall be further managed to provide OSH for workers in such forms of employment
  . |

Section opinion

Amendment

Although open-ended contracts remain the benchmark, we are seeing an increase in flexible or non-standard forms of employment, such as on-call and platform work.
  Because they have little influence on the way they work
  ,
  workers in
  such
  forms of employment generally have
  to
  contend with poor working conditions (uncomfortable posture, excessive
  work
  rate
  ,
  severe work pressure
  ,
  lack
  of
  autonomy
  and
  little variety in their tasks)

   (1).

Although open-ended contracts remain the benchmark, we are seeing an increase in flexible or non-standard forms of employment, such as on-call and platform work.
  Teleworking carries some risks
  , such
  as possible challenges related
  to
  : the worker becoming invisible in the
  work
  community; missing out on formal and informal support structures
  ,
  personal contacts with colleagues and access to information
  ,
  promotion and training opportunities; possible worsening
  of
  gender inequalities
  and
  increased risk of violence and harassment

   (1)

  , which shall be further managed to provide OSH for workers in such forms of employment
  .

Reason

We propose to delete part of this very general statement and use text from the consensual SOC/662 (1) that states i.a. that teleworking carries some risks, such as possible challenges related to: the worker becoming invisible in the work community; missing out on formal and informal support structures, personal contacts with colleagues and access to information, promotion and training opportunities; possible worsening of gender inequalities and increased risk of violence and harassment.

It should also be recalled that for instance, persons in flexible or platform work often have more liberties to define the hours worked. Whether work is commissioned through a platform has very little to do with work ergonomics etc. It is still the same work performance as it would be without the platform too (for example uber vs taxi driver). Also, excessive work rate-argument is not valid as in reality the situation can be quite the contrary.

Furthermore, there is no causality between having a flexible or non-standard contract and poor working conditions.

Outcome of the vote:

| In favour: | 101 |
| --- | --- |
| Against: | 133 |
| Abstentions: | 21 |

In favour:

101

Against:

133

Abstentions:

21

AMENDMENT 3

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 3.2.1.4

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| These transitions
  will
  lead to a shift in occupational risks. Firstly,
  to
  the margins of the workforce
  , through the combined development
  of subcontracting and
  precarious
  contracts, which
  are
  less protective in terms of OSH. Then towards new vulnerabilities linked to working conditions, through the hybridisation of flexible forms of organisation and new forms of the old Taylorist practices. And finally towards new work-related problems, reflected in the endemic rise in occupational stress and related illnesses. | These transitions
  may
  lead to a shift in occupational risks.
  Those potential risks might be addressed by placing special attention in the process of social dialogue on:
  Firstly, the margins of the workforce
  in case
  of subcontracting and
  uncertain
  contracts, which
  may be
  less protective in terms of OSH. Then towards new vulnerabilities linked to working conditions, through the hybridisation of flexible forms of organisation and new forms of the old Taylorist practices. And finally towards new work-related problems, reflected in the endemic rise in occupational stress and related illnesses. |

Section opinion

Amendment

These transitions
  will
  lead to a shift in occupational risks. Firstly,
  to
  the margins of the workforce
  , through the combined development
  of subcontracting and
  precarious
  contracts, which
  are
  less protective in terms of OSH. Then towards new vulnerabilities linked to working conditions, through the hybridisation of flexible forms of organisation and new forms of the old Taylorist practices. And finally towards new work-related problems, reflected in the endemic rise in occupational stress and related illnesses.

These transitions
  may
  lead to a shift in occupational risks.
  Those potential risks might be addressed by placing special attention in the process of social dialogue on:
  Firstly, the margins of the workforce
  in case
  of subcontracting and
  uncertain
  contracts, which
  may be
  less protective in terms of OSH. Then towards new vulnerabilities linked to working conditions, through the hybridisation of flexible forms of organisation and new forms of the old Taylorist practices. And finally towards new work-related problems, reflected in the endemic rise in occupational stress and related illnesses.

Reason

By this change we are acknowledging that the shift in the forms of work requires more attention through social dialogue at the appropriate level in regard to both OSH. Also, although there might be some new vulnerabilities linked to working conditions in the new forms of work, it is important to understand that not all non-standard forms of employment, such as subcontracting are automatically less protective in terms of OSH, and might as well have the same level of OSH protection as standard form of employment.

Outcome of the vote:

| In favour: | 98 |
| --- | --- |
| Against: | 147 |
| Abstentions: | 17 |

In favour:

98

Against:

147

Abstentions:

17

AMENDMENT 4

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 4.2

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| It is important to ensure that the agreements reached through SD are being properly implemented. The EESC
  reiterates its support

   (1)

  for
  the ILO recommendation (2) of one labour inspector per 10 000 workers and stresses the need to strengthen the role of
  trade union representatives
  in OSH. At all levels, the social partners must be sufficiently involved in the design and implementation of the preventive measures, in accordance with the Framework Directive. | It is important to ensure that the agreements reached through SD are being properly implemented. The EESC
  notes
  the ILO recommendation (1) of one labour inspector per 10 000 workers and stresses the need to strengthen the role of
  social partners
  in OSH. At all levels, the social partners must be sufficiently involved in the design and implementation of the preventive measures, in accordance with the Framework Directive. |

Section opinion

Amendment

It is important to ensure that the agreements reached through SD are being properly implemented. The EESC
  reiterates its support

   (1)

  for
  the ILO recommendation (2) of one labour inspector per 10 000 workers and stresses the need to strengthen the role of
  trade union representatives
  in OSH. At all levels, the social partners must be sufficiently involved in the design and implementation of the preventive measures, in accordance with the Framework Directive.

It is important to ensure that the agreements reached through SD are being properly implemented. The EESC
  notes
  the ILO recommendation (1) of one labour inspector per 10 000 workers and stresses the need to strengthen the role of
  social partners
  in OSH. At all levels, the social partners must be sufficiently involved in the design and implementation of the preventive measures, in accordance with the Framework Directive.

Reason

We propose to use ‘note’ instead of ‘supporting’. Also, in the second phrase it is correct to talk about social partners in general.

Outcome of the vote:

| In favour: | 103 |
| --- | --- |
| Against: | 150 |
| Abstentions: | 15 |

In favour:

103

Against:

150

Abstentions:

15

AMENDMENT 5

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 4.3

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| With the wholesale shift to teleworking,
  there is
  a need to extend the remit of labour inspectorates. As is the case in Spain (1), inspectors
  should be
  able to carry out checks on the conditions under which teleworking is carried out, at the employee’s request and with due regard to privacy. This
  should include
  recording complaints about not being properly equipped, non-compliance with the right to disconnect, etc. | With the wholesale shift to teleworking,
  some Member States have seen
  a need to extend the remit of labour inspectorates. As is the case in Spain (1), inspectors
  are
  able to carry out checks on the conditions under which teleworking is carried out, at the employee’s request and with due regard to privacy. This
  includes
  recording complaints about not being properly equipped, non-compliance with the right to disconnect, etc.
  The employers should be required to ensure the availability of teleworking equipment only when the employee is obliged to work from home
  . |

Section opinion

Amendment

With the wholesale shift to teleworking,
  there is
  a need to extend the remit of labour inspectorates. As is the case in Spain (1), inspectors
  should be
  able to carry out checks on the conditions under which teleworking is carried out, at the employee’s request and with due regard to privacy. This
  should include
  recording complaints about not being properly equipped, non-compliance with the right to disconnect, etc.

With the wholesale shift to teleworking,
  some Member States have seen
  a need to extend the remit of labour inspectorates. As is the case in Spain (1), inspectors
  are
  able to carry out checks on the conditions under which teleworking is carried out, at the employee’s request and with due regard to privacy. This
  includes
  recording complaints about not being properly equipped, non-compliance with the right to disconnect, etc.
  The employers should be required to ensure the availability of teleworking equipment only when the employee is obliged to work from home
  .

Reason

While we would agree on describing a system of one particular Member State (Spain) as an example, it is not justified to propose to have that system introduced in other countries as well, given the fact that the organisation and modalities of labour inspection are a matter for the Member States.

If the employer offers already one workplace (normally office) where the employee has all the necessary equipment, there should not be an obligation to duplicate this equipment to home as well if the employer is not requiring the employee to work from home. Especially for small companies duplication of work equipment can be a big cost burden.

Outcome of the vote:

| In favour: | 107 |
| --- | --- |
| Against: | 149 |
| Abstentions: | 16 |

In favour:

107

Against:

149

Abstentions:

16

AMENDMENT 7

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 4.12

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| With regard to combating work-related cancer, the EESC
  calls for a more ambitious position covering
  the
  50 priority carcinogens. The scope of Directive 2004/37/EC should also be expanded to reprotoxic substances and hazardous medicinal products

   (1)

  . In addition, chronic stress increases
  the
  risk of developing cancer

   (2)

  , and night-time shift work can be a cause of breast cancer, prostate cancer
  and
  bowel cancer

   (3)

  . A risk-based approach is needed, not a methodology that sees worker protection as a cost. | With regard to combating work-related cancer, the EESC
  welcomes
  the
  provisional agreement reached by
  the
  European Parliament
  and the
  Council at
  the
  end
  of
  2021 on better protecting workers from risks related to the exposure to carcinogenic and mutagenic substances by updating the Carcinogens and Mutagens Directive
  . |

Section opinion

Amendment

With regard to combating work-related cancer, the EESC
  calls for a more ambitious position covering
  the
  50 priority carcinogens. The scope of Directive 2004/37/EC should also be expanded to reprotoxic substances and hazardous medicinal products

   (1)

  . In addition, chronic stress increases
  the
  risk of developing cancer

   (2)

  , and night-time shift work can be a cause of breast cancer, prostate cancer
  and
  bowel cancer

   (3)

  . A risk-based approach is needed, not a methodology that sees worker protection as a cost.

With regard to combating work-related cancer, the EESC
  welcomes
  the
  provisional agreement reached by
  the
  European Parliament
  and the
  Council at
  the
  end
  of
  2021 on better protecting workers from risks related to the exposure to carcinogenic and mutagenic substances by updating the Carcinogens and Mutagens Directive
  .

Reason

It should be noted that in December 2021 the European Parliament and Council reached a provisional agreement on better protecting workers from risks related to the exposure to carcinogenic and mutagenic substances. To improve workers’ protection against cancer, the Commission had proposed in 2020 to further limit their exposure to cancer-causing chemicals. This initiative is also part of the Commission’s commitment to fight cancer under Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan. The Commission has underlined that under that agreement to update the Carcinogens and Mutagens Directive, around 1 million workers will benefit from greater safeguards due to the setting of the occupational exposure limits for acrylonitrile and nickel compounds and the lowering of the limits for benzene.

Outcome of the vote:

| In favour: | 98 |
| --- | --- |
| Against: | 156 |
| Abstentions: | 17 |

In favour:

98

Against:

156

Abstentions:

17

AMENDMENT 8

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 4.13

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| MSDs remain the biggest OSH problem in the EU. At company level, prevention
  will only
  be effective if there is high-quality SD and a well-functioning health and safety committee (where these exist). SD at sectoral level can also play its part, through specific guidelines, awareness-raising and the exchange of experience, and the dissemination of good practices. At European level, the development of a comprehensive, long-term and integrated policy requires the
  reactivation
  of
  the draft MSD Directive
  . | MSDs remain the biggest OSH problem in the EU. At company level, prevention
  can
  be
  more
  effective if there is high-quality SD and a well-functioning health and safety committee (where these exist). SD at sectoral level can also play its part, through specific guidelines, awareness-raising and the exchange of experience, and the dissemination of good practices. At European level, the development of a comprehensive, long-term and integrated policy requires
  taking measures as indicated in
  the
  Commission EU strategic framework on health and safety at work 2021 — 2027 Occupational safety and health in a changing world
  of
  work
  . |

Section opinion

Amendment

MSDs remain the biggest OSH problem in the EU. At company level, prevention
  will only
  be effective if there is high-quality SD and a well-functioning health and safety committee (where these exist). SD at sectoral level can also play its part, through specific guidelines, awareness-raising and the exchange of experience, and the dissemination of good practices. At European level, the development of a comprehensive, long-term and integrated policy requires the
  reactivation
  of
  the draft MSD Directive
  .

MSDs remain the biggest OSH problem in the EU. At company level, prevention
  can
  be
  more
  effective if there is high-quality SD and a well-functioning health and safety committee (where these exist). SD at sectoral level can also play its part, through specific guidelines, awareness-raising and the exchange of experience, and the dissemination of good practices. At European level, the development of a comprehensive, long-term and integrated policy requires
  taking measures as indicated in
  the
  Commission EU strategic framework on health and safety at work 2021 — 2027 Occupational safety and health in a changing world
  of
  work
  .

Reason

The Commission strategy i.a. includes the aim of the Commission to make psychosocial and ergonomic risks part of the healthy workplaces campaign.

Outcome of the vote:

| In favour: | 95 |
| --- | --- |
| Against: | 161 |
| Abstentions: | 16 |

In favour:

95

Against:

161

Abstentions:

16

AMENDMENT 9

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 4.14

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The
  incomplete
  implementation of the
  2004 autonomous
  framework agreement
  on
  work-related stress
  underlines
  the
  need for European PSR legislation
  . The EESC points out that an effective preventive approach requires action to be taken on the factors involved — namely the organisation of work. An approach focused on the mental health of the individual will not reduce work-related stress. | The
  EESC calls for strengthening the role of social partners in awareness raising and prevention measures of PSR. PSRs need to be addressed primarily at work-place/company level, there is no one-size-fits all solution that would work well in all companies or Member States as the problems are also different. According to the
  implementation
  report prepared by the signatories
  of the framework agreement
  , despite the different challenges and obstacles, implementation of the European framework agreement and the reports themselves clearly contribute an important added value in the area of
  work-related stress
  and
  the
  development of social dialogue

   (1). The EESC points out that an effective preventive approach requires action to be taken on the factors involved — namely the organisation of work. An approach focused on the mental health of the individual will not reduce work-related stress
  . PSRs are a complex issue with different impact factors such as working conditions, workload management, work relationships but also individual capabilities. |

Section opinion

Amendment

The
  incomplete
  implementation of the
  2004 autonomous
  framework agreement
  on
  work-related stress
  underlines
  the
  need for European PSR legislation
  . The EESC points out that an effective preventive approach requires action to be taken on the factors involved — namely the organisation of work. An approach focused on the mental health of the individual will not reduce work-related stress.

The
  EESC calls for strengthening the role of social partners in awareness raising and prevention measures of PSR. PSRs need to be addressed primarily at work-place/company level, there is no one-size-fits all solution that would work well in all companies or Member States as the problems are also different. According to the
  implementation
  report prepared by the signatories
  of the framework agreement
  , despite the different challenges and obstacles, implementation of the European framework agreement and the reports themselves clearly contribute an important added value in the area of
  work-related stress
  and
  the
  development of social dialogue

   (1). The EESC points out that an effective preventive approach requires action to be taken on the factors involved — namely the organisation of work. An approach focused on the mental health of the individual will not reduce work-related stress
  . PSRs are a complex issue with different impact factors such as working conditions, workload management, work relationships but also individual capabilities.

Reason

We should here diverge the approach more towards strengthening the role of social partners in awareness raising and prevention measures of PSR. PSRs need to be addressed primarily at work-place/company level, there is no one-size-fits all solution that would work well in all companies or Member States as the problems are also different.

We do not agree with the need for legislation but agree with the approach of the Commission to prepare, in cooperation with Member States and social partners, a non-legislative EU-level initiative related to mental health at work that assesses emerging issues related to workers’ mental health.

Finally, There is an implementation report prepared by the signatories of the autonomous framework agreement on work related stress https://www.businesseurope.eu/sites/buseur/files/media/imported/2008-02495-E.pdf, which states i.a. that ‘Despite the different challenges and obstacles, implementation of the European framework agreement and the reports themselves clearly contribute an important added value in the area of work-related stress and the development of social dialogue.’

Outcome of the vote:

| In favour: | 97 |
| --- | --- |
| Against: | 159 |
| Abstentions: | 14 |

In favour:

97

Against:

159

Abstentions:

14

AMENDMENT 10

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 4.16

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The EESC
  is disappointed
  that self-employed workers
  have been excluded from
  the scope of the strategic framework.
  Some so-called self-employed platform workers are
  in
  fact subject
  to
  an employer-employee relationship
  with the
  platform via algorithmic management
  .
  The pandemic has highlighted
  the
  vulnerability
  of
  these workers and
  the
  shortcomings
  of
  platforms in terms
  of
  prevention. The exposure
  of
  these
  workers
  to uncontrolled risks
  ,
  as a result
  of their
  exclusion from
  the
  strategic framework
  ,
  is a situation that should not continue
  . | The EESC
  notes
  that self-employed workers
  are not in
  the scope of the strategic framework.
  The EESC has earlier recommended that a study be carried out
  in
  useful time involving the Commission, experts and the social partners,
  to
  find the best solution
  with
  due regard for
  the
  principle that all self-employed must also have a safe and healthy working environment
  .
  Furthermore,
  the
  EESC notes that the Council recommendation
  of
  18 February 2003 concerning
  the
  improvement
  of
  the protection
  of
  the health and safety at work
  of
  self-employed
  workers (1)

  recommends that Member States promote
  ,
  in the context
  of their
  policies on preventing occupational accidents and diseases,
  the
  safety and health of self-employed workers
  ,
  while taking account of the special risks existing in specific sectors and the specific nature of the relationship between contracting undertakings and self-employed workers. |

Section opinion

Amendment

The EESC
  is disappointed
  that self-employed workers
  have been excluded from
  the scope of the strategic framework.
  Some so-called self-employed platform workers are
  in
  fact subject
  to
  an employer-employee relationship
  with the
  platform via algorithmic management
  .
  The pandemic has highlighted
  the
  vulnerability
  of
  these workers and
  the
  shortcomings
  of
  platforms in terms
  of
  prevention. The exposure
  of
  these
  workers
  to uncontrolled risks
  ,
  as a result
  of their
  exclusion from
  the
  strategic framework
  ,
  is a situation that should not continue
  .

The EESC
  notes
  that self-employed workers
  are not in
  the scope of the strategic framework.
  The EESC has earlier recommended that a study be carried out
  in
  useful time involving the Commission, experts and the social partners,
  to
  find the best solution
  with
  due regard for
  the
  principle that all self-employed must also have a safe and healthy working environment
  .
  Furthermore,
  the
  EESC notes that the Council recommendation
  of
  18 February 2003 concerning
  the
  improvement
  of
  the protection
  of
  the health and safety at work
  of
  self-employed
  workers (1)

  recommends that Member States promote
  ,
  in the context
  of their
  policies on preventing occupational accidents and diseases,
  the
  safety and health of self-employed workers
  ,
  while taking account of the special risks existing in specific sectors and the specific nature of the relationship between contracting undertakings and self-employed workers.

Reason

On 9 December the Commission adopted its proposal on the Directive on improving working conditions in platform work. There will be a separate EESC opinion (SOC/709) prepared on that proposal and therefore the issues should not be addressed in this opinion.

The text should refer to the Council recommendation of 18 February 2003 concerning the improvement of the protection of the health and safety at work of self-employed workers.

Outcome of the vote:

| In favour: | 99 |
| --- | --- |
| Against: | 162 |
| Abstentions: | 14 |

In favour:

99

Against:

162

Abstentions:

14

AMENDMENT 11

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 4.17

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The EESC
  stresses the asymmetric relationships
  between the platforms and
  these workers
  , and points out that freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining are fundamental rights. Proper organisation and representation are vital in order to facilitate SD and collective bargaining
  . Moreover, social protection rights should be extended to these workers
  . | The EESC
  notes that special attention shall be devoted to safeguard a fair relationship
  between the platforms and
  those conducting work through platforms
  , and points out that freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining are fundamental rights. Proper organisation and representation are vital in order to facilitate SD and collective bargaining. |

Section opinion

Amendment

The EESC
  stresses the asymmetric relationships
  between the platforms and
  these workers
  , and points out that freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining are fundamental rights. Proper organisation and representation are vital in order to facilitate SD and collective bargaining
  . Moreover, social protection rights should be extended to these workers
  .

The EESC
  notes that special attention shall be devoted to safeguard a fair relationship
  between the platforms and
  those conducting work through platforms
  , and points out that freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining are fundamental rights. Proper organisation and representation are vital in order to facilitate SD and collective bargaining.

Reason

The amendment recognises the need to safeguard fair relationship between platform and those who use platforms to conduct work performances, be it as a worker or as an entrepreneur/self-employed. The amendment also corrects the incorrect assumption that all those working through platforms are workers as they might also be self-employed or entrepreneurs.

Outcome of the vote:

AMENDMENT 12

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 4.22

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The benefits of teleworking depend on how it is organised by the employer. Teleworking
  should
  be regulated by collective bargaining in order to prevent the difficulties that have been identified in numerous surveys (1). The European Framework Agreement signed in 2002 is
  not suited
  to
  meeting
  these new challenges
  . The EESC recommends that new guidelines be drawn up, with a particular focus on PSR and MSDs
  . | As stated in the 2002 framework agreement, telework is voluntary for the worker and the employer concerned. Teleworking may be required as part of a workers’ initial job description or it may be engaged in as a voluntary agreement subsequently.
  The benefits of teleworking depend
  i.a.
  on how it is organised
  and agreed upon
  by the employer
  and the employee
  . Teleworking
  can
  be regulated by collective bargaining
  for instance
  in order to prevent the difficulties that have been identified in numerous surveys (1). The European Framework Agreement signed in 2002 is
  still valid
  to
  meet
  these new challenges. |

Section opinion

Amendment

The benefits of teleworking depend on how it is organised by the employer. Teleworking
  should
  be regulated by collective bargaining in order to prevent the difficulties that have been identified in numerous surveys (1). The European Framework Agreement signed in 2002 is
  not suited
  to
  meeting
  these new challenges
  . The EESC recommends that new guidelines be drawn up, with a particular focus on PSR and MSDs
  .

As stated in the 2002 framework agreement, telework is voluntary for the worker and the employer concerned. Teleworking may be required as part of a workers’ initial job description or it may be engaged in as a voluntary agreement subsequently.
  The benefits of teleworking depend
  i.a.
  on how it is organised
  and agreed upon
  by the employer
  and the employee
  . Teleworking
  can
  be regulated by collective bargaining
  for instance
  in order to prevent the difficulties that have been identified in numerous surveys (1). The European Framework Agreement signed in 2002 is
  still valid
  to
  meet
  these new challenges.

Reason

The 2002 European Framework Agreement is still suited to meet the challenges posed by teleworking.

Outcome of the vote:

AMENDMENT 13

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 1.4

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The 2002 European Framework Agreement
  is not suited to
  meeting the new challenges posed by teleworking
  . The EESC recommends that new guidelines be drawn up, with a particular focus on preventing psychosocial risks (PSR) and musculo-skeletal disorders (MSDs)
  . | The 2002 European Framework Agreement
  , complemented by the EU SP Framework Agreement on Digitalisation from 2020, provide sound ground for
  meeting the new challenges posed by teleworking. |

Section opinion

Amendment

The 2002 European Framework Agreement
  is not suited to
  meeting the new challenges posed by teleworking
  . The EESC recommends that new guidelines be drawn up, with a particular focus on preventing psychosocial risks (PSR) and musculo-skeletal disorders (MSDs)
  .

The 2002 European Framework Agreement
  , complemented by the EU SP Framework Agreement on Digitalisation from 2020, provide sound ground for
  meeting the new challenges posed by teleworking.

Reason

The 2002 European Framework Agreement is still suited to meet the challenges posed by teleworking.

Outcome of the vote:

AMENDMENT 14

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 1.10

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The EESC calls for
  a system to be put in place
  to assess the impact of the legislative initiatives, collective agreements and European action plans in this area
  , and reiterates its recommendation

   (1)

  of one labour inspector for every 10 000 workers. | The EESC calls for
  further efforts
  to assess the impact of the legislative initiatives, collective agreements and European action plans in this area. |

Section opinion

Amendment

The EESC calls for
  a system to be put in place
  to assess the impact of the legislative initiatives, collective agreements and European action plans in this area
  , and reiterates its recommendation

   (1)

  of one labour inspector for every 10 000 workers.

The EESC calls for
  further efforts
  to assess the impact of the legislative initiatives, collective agreements and European action plans in this area.

Reason

There is already systems for impact assessments. Also the framework agreements have their own implementation follow-up.

As stated by the EC, occupational disease is a matter closely linked to social security, which is a national competence. On labour inspectorates: there is also the qualitative aspect and the fact that in ILO language labour inspection is not just health and safety but also other labour inspections (social, undeclared work, labour admin, etc.)

Since the pandemic and as the number of physical labour inspections declined in some Member States due to sanitary measures, digital tools were introduced to facilitate the carrying out inspections virtually (or at least some parts of the inspection can be done virtually). These new working methods can also increase the efficiency of the labour inspections. It is up to the Member States to decide how to organise labour inspections.

Outcome of the vote:

AMENDMENT 15

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 1.12

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| With regard to combating work-related cancer, the EESC
  calls for a more ambitious position covering
  the
  50 priority carcinogens, as well as reprotoxic substances
  and
  hazardous medicinal products,
  and
  including stress

   (1) and
  shift work[2]

   (2)

  . | With regard to combating work-related cancer, the EESC
  welcomes
  the
  provisional agreement reached by the European Parliament
  and
  the Council at the end of 2021 on better protecting workers from risks related to the exposure to carcinogenic
  and
  mutagenic substances by updating the Carcinogens
  and
  Mutagens Directive
  . |

Section opinion

Amendment

With regard to combating work-related cancer, the EESC
  calls for a more ambitious position covering
  the
  50 priority carcinogens, as well as reprotoxic substances
  and
  hazardous medicinal products,
  and
  including stress

   (1) and
  shift work[2]

   (2)

  .

With regard to combating work-related cancer, the EESC
  welcomes
  the
  provisional agreement reached by the European Parliament
  and
  the Council at the end of 2021 on better protecting workers from risks related to the exposure to carcinogenic
  and
  mutagenic substances by updating the Carcinogens
  and
  Mutagens Directive
  .

Reason

It should be noted that in December 2021 the European Parliament and Council reached a provisional agreement on better protecting workers from risks related to the exposure to carcinogenic and mutagenic substances. To improve workers’ protection against cancer, the Commission had proposed in 2020 to further limit their exposure to cancer-causing chemicals. This initiative is also part of the Commission’s commitment to fight cancer under Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan. The Commission has underlined that under that agreement to update the Carcinogens and Mutagens Directive, around 1 million workers will benefit from greater safeguards due to the setting of the occupational exposure limits for acrylonitrile and nickel compounds and the lowering of the limits for benzene.

Outcome of the vote:

AMENDMENT 16

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 1.13

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The EESC calls for
  EU legislation
  on PSR. An effective preventive approach requires action to be taken with regard to the working environment rather than focusing solely on the mental health of the individual. | The EESC calls for
  more attention and extra effort
  on
  strengthening the role of social partners in awareness raising and prevention measures of
  PSR
  . PSRs need to be addressed primarily at work-place/company level, there is no one-size-fits all solution that would work well in all companies or Member States as the problems are also different. According to the implementation report prepared by the signatories of the framework agreement, despite the different challenges and obstacles, implementation of the European framework agreement and the reports themselves clearly contribute an important added value in the area of work-related stress and the development of social dialogue
  . An effective preventive approach requires action to be taken with regard to the working environment rather than focusing solely on the mental health of the
  individual. However, PSRs are a complex issue with different impact factors such as working conditions, workload management, work relationships but also
  individual
  capabilities
  . |

Section opinion

Amendment

The EESC calls for
  EU legislation
  on PSR. An effective preventive approach requires action to be taken with regard to the working environment rather than focusing solely on the mental health of the individual.

The EESC calls for
  more attention and extra effort
  on
  strengthening the role of social partners in awareness raising and prevention measures of
  PSR
  . PSRs need to be addressed primarily at work-place/company level, there is no one-size-fits all solution that would work well in all companies or Member States as the problems are also different. According to the implementation report prepared by the signatories of the framework agreement, despite the different challenges and obstacles, implementation of the European framework agreement and the reports themselves clearly contribute an important added value in the area of work-related stress and the development of social dialogue
  . An effective preventive approach requires action to be taken with regard to the working environment rather than focusing solely on the mental health of the
  individual. However, PSRs are a complex issue with different impact factors such as working conditions, workload management, work relationships but also
  individual
  capabilities
  .

Reason

Legislation is not the remedy for everything. We should here diverge the approach more towards strengthening the role of social partners in awareness raising and prevention measures of PSR. PSRs need to be addressed primarily at work-place/company level, there is no one-size-fits all solution that would work well in all companies or Member States as the problems are also different.

We do not agree with the need for legislation but agree with the approach of the Commission to prepare, in cooperation with Member States and social partners, a non- legislative EU-level initiative related to mental health at work that assesses emerging issues related to workers’ mental health.

There is an implementation report prepared by the signatories of the framework agreement https://www.businesseurope.eu/sites/buseur/files/media/imported/2008-02495-E.pdf which states i.e. that ‘Despite the different challenges and obstacles, implementation of the European framework agreement and the reports themselves clearly contribute an important added value in the area of work-related stress and the development of social dialogue.’

PSRs are a complex issue with different impact factors such as working conditions, workload management, work relationships but also individual capabilities.

Outcome of the vote:

AMENDMENT 17

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 1.14

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The EESC considers that the development of a comprehensive, long-term and integrated prevention policy requires the
  reactivation
  of
  the draft MSD Directive
  . | The EESC considers that the development of a comprehensive, long-term and integrated prevention policy requires
  taking measures as indicated in
  the
  Commission EU strategic framework on health and safety at work 2021 — 2027 Occupational safety and health in a changing world
  of
  work
  . |

Section opinion

Amendment

The EESC considers that the development of a comprehensive, long-term and integrated prevention policy requires the
  reactivation
  of
  the draft MSD Directive
  .

The EESC considers that the development of a comprehensive, long-term and integrated prevention policy requires
  taking measures as indicated in
  the
  Commission EU strategic framework on health and safety at work 2021 — 2027 Occupational safety and health in a changing world
  of
  work
  .

Reason

The Commission strategy i.a. includes the aim of the Commission to make psychosocial and ergonomic risks part of the healthy workplaces campaign.

Outcome of the vote:

AMENDMENT 18

Tabled by:

ANGELOVA Milena

GAVRILOVS Vitālijs

KONTKANEN Mira-Maria

PILAWSKI Lech

VADÁSZ Borbála

SOC/703 — Social dialogue as a tool to promote health and safety at work

Point 1.16

Amend as follows:

| Section opinion | Amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The EESC
  calls for platform workers to be included in the scope
  of
  the strategic framework. The right to organise, be represented and to engage
  in
  collective bargaining should
  be
  guaranteed, and social protection rights extended to these workers
  . | The EESC
  notes that Commission has adopted
  of
  9 December its proposal on Directive on improving working conditions
  in
  platform work. There will
  be
  a separate EESC opinion (SOC/709) prepared on that proposal
  . |

Section opinion

Amendment

The EESC
  calls for platform workers to be included in the scope
  of
  the strategic framework. The right to organise, be represented and to engage
  in
  collective bargaining should
  be
  guaranteed, and social protection rights extended to these workers
  .

The EESC
  notes that Commission has adopted
  of
  9 December its proposal on Directive on improving working conditions
  in
  platform work. There will
  be
  a separate EESC opinion (SOC/709) prepared on that proposal
  .

Reason

The Commission has adopted on 9 December its proposal on Directive on improving working conditions in platform work. There will be a separate EESC opinion (SOC/709) prepared on that proposal and therefore the issues should not be addressed in this opinion.

Outcome of the vote:

---

(1)  
  Bérastégui P. (2021)
  ,
  Exposure to Psychosocial Risk Factors in the Gig Economy: A Systematic Review
  .
  ETUI Research Report
  2021.
  01
  .

(1)  

  OJ C 220, 9.6.2021, p. 13-25

  .

(1)  Not yet published in the Official Journal.

(1)  
  https:/www.eesc.europa.eu/en/our-work/opinions-information-reports/opinions/health-safety-work-eu-strategic-framework-2021-2027

(2)  https://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb297/pdf/esp-3.pdf

(1)  https://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb297/pdf/esp-3.pdf

(1)  https://ec.europa.eu/social/ajax/BlobServlet?docId=23324&langId=en

(1)  https://ec.europa.eu/social/ajax/BlobServlet?docId=23324&langId=en

(1)  
  A chemical which may impair
  the
  fertility of a man or woman or impair
  the
  development
  of
  an unborn child.

(2)  
  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7466429/

(3)  
  https://www.cancer-environnement.fr/597-Vol-124--Cancerogenicite-du-travail-de-nuit-poste.ce.aspx.

(1)  
  https://www.businesseurope.eu/sites/buseur/files/media/imported/2008-02495-E.pdf

(1)  
  https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1fd9fbe0-1ee4-4928-a47d-4404b5301bbd

(1)  https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/data/covid-19/working-teleworking.

(1)  https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/data/covid-19/working-teleworking.

(1)  
  SOC/698
  .

(1)  
  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7466429/.

(2)  
  [2] https://www.cancer-environnement.fr/597-Vol-124--Cancerogenicite-du-travail-de-nuit-poste.ce.aspx

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/72 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/72

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Food security and sustainable food systems

(exploratory opinion requested by the French presidency)

(2022/C 194/10)

| Rapporteur: | Arnold PUECH d’ALISSAC |
| --- | --- |
| Co-rapporteur: | Peter SCHMIDT |

Rapporteur:

Arnold PUECH d’ALISSAC

Co-rapporteur:

Peter SCHMIDT

| Referral | Letter from the French presidency of the Council, 21.9.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment |
| Adopted in section | 7.1.2022 |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 165/2/2 |

Referral

Letter from the French presidency of the Council, 21.9.2021

Legal basis

Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment

Adopted in section

7.1.2022

Adopted at plenary

19.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

165/2/2

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | The EESC has been the first EU institution to call for a comprehensive food policy in the EU, with the aim of nurturing healthy diets from sustainable food systems, linking agriculture to nutrition and ecosystem services, and ensuring supply chains that safeguard public health for all sections of European society (1). Such a policy, now reflected in the F2F strategy, should improve consistency across food-related policy areas, raise awareness of the value of food and promote sustainable food systems. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | In response to the French Presidency’s request for this exploratory opinion, the EESC identifies the following key levers to be used at EU level to safeguard the competitiveness (2) of European producers, with a view to ensuring both European food security and sustainability and affordable prices for consumers:






  i. | fostering an open strategic autonomy for food security and sustainability; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.2.

i.

fostering an open strategic autonomy for food security and sustainability;

| ii. | developing innovative technologies and seeds to always be able to provide solutions to farmers faced with restrictions on existing tools; |
| --- | --- |

ii.

developing innovative technologies and seeds to always be able to provide solutions to farmers faced with restrictions on existing tools;

| iii. | ensuring broadband coverage and digitalisation as a precondition for precision farming and robotics, and supporting the investments in such sustainable techniques; |
| --- | --- |

iii.

ensuring broadband coverage and digitalisation as a precondition for precision farming and robotics, and supporting the investments in such sustainable techniques;

| iv. | promoting and facilitating access to training on these new technologies for agricultural producers, especially for young farmers; |
| --- | --- |

iv.

promoting and facilitating access to training on these new technologies for agricultural producers, especially for young farmers;

| v. | ensuring reciprocity of standards and a level-playing field by incorporating the Green Deal’s F2F and Biodiversity strategies and their norms as global sustainability standards in all future EU trade deals and having them included in existing trade agreements and in WTO agreements; |
| --- | --- |

v.

ensuring reciprocity of standards and a level-playing field by incorporating the Green Deal’s F2F and Biodiversity strategies and their norms as global sustainability standards in all future EU trade deals and having them included in existing trade agreements and in WTO agreements;

| vi. | promoting the value of food, by fostering food education among consumers, which contributes to bringing the agricultural sector closer to society; |
| --- | --- |

vi.

promoting the value of food, by fostering food education among consumers, which contributes to bringing the agricultural sector closer to society;

| vii. | ensuring fair prices and distribution of income along the chain, improving consumers’ willingness to pay appropriate prices for food to consume less but better, and banning unfair trading practices (UTPs) through ambitious regulations; |
| --- | --- |

vii.

ensuring fair prices and distribution of income along the chain, improving consumers’ willingness to pay appropriate prices for food to consume less but better, and banning unfair trading practices (UTPs) through ambitious regulations;

| viii. | aligning food business practices and operations with the SDGs; |
| --- | --- |

viii.

aligning food business practices and operations with the SDGs;

| ix. | ensuring the structured involvement and participation of civil society and of all stakeholders across the food supply chain, including through a European Food Policy Council — fostering cooperation rather than competition. |
| --- | --- |

ix.

ensuring the structured involvement and participation of civil society and of all stakeholders across the food supply chain, including through a European Food Policy Council — fostering cooperation rather than competition.

| 1.3. | Furthermore, the EESC identifies the following key levers to help reduce dependence on inputs, including synthetic inputs, and improve the EU’s protein autonomy:






  i. | the EU should support low-input practices, especially in terms of fossil fuels and pesticides and foster the production capacity of agricultural inputs in Europe; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.3.

i.

the EU should support low-input practices, especially in terms of fossil fuels and pesticides and foster the production capacity of agricultural inputs in Europe;

| ii. | improving the EU’s protein autonomy is desirable from all points of view. Imports of soybeans from third countries can be responsible for deforestation, forest degradation and the destruction of natural ecosystems in certain producing countries. The development of legumes and pulses with high protein content in the Union would limit the use of imports and thus have a positive impact on the climate and the environment; |
| --- | --- |

ii.

improving the EU’s protein autonomy is desirable from all points of view. Imports of soybeans from third countries can be responsible for deforestation, forest degradation and the destruction of natural ecosystems in certain producing countries. The development of legumes and pulses with high protein content in the Union would limit the use of imports and thus have a positive impact on the climate and the environment;

| iii. | organising and supporting the protein sector to promote production and convince farmers, in particular through an ambitious Common Agricultural Policy (CAP); |
| --- | --- |

iii.

organising and supporting the protein sector to promote production and convince farmers, in particular through an ambitious Common Agricultural Policy (CAP);

| iv. | enhancing the production of oilseed and oilseed cake. With the primary objective of food production, the valuation of oilseeds is based on the valuation of both oil and cakes, and cannot be dissociated. This makes it possible to enhance the sustainable production of food and energy; |
| --- | --- |

iv.

enhancing the production of oilseed and oilseed cake. With the primary objective of food production, the valuation of oilseeds is based on the valuation of both oil and cakes, and cannot be dissociated. This makes it possible to enhance the sustainable production of food and energy;

| v. | strengthening the EU’s action to protect and restore the world’s forests, notably by an improvement of the current forest certification n system (PEFC, FSC) to approve products that do not contribute to deforestation; |
| --- | --- |

v.

strengthening the EU’s action to protect and restore the world’s forests, notably by an improvement of the current forest certification n system (PEFC, FSC) to approve products that do not contribute to deforestation;

| vi. | developing short, fair and transparent supply chains and ensuring that the transition towards sustainable farming takes place with a progressive approach to preserve existing balances; |
| --- | --- |

vi.

developing short, fair and transparent supply chains and ensuring that the transition towards sustainable farming takes place with a progressive approach to preserve existing balances;

| vii. | ensuring the realisation of the right to food for all, in particular for those in economic and social insecurity, and facilitating experimentation in social innovation. Food aid must remain a mandatory policy in Member States; |
| --- | --- |

vii.

ensuring the realisation of the right to food for all, in particular for those in economic and social insecurity, and facilitating experimentation in social innovation. Food aid must remain a mandatory policy in Member States;

| viii. | ensuring that food can be produced in all parts of the EU. |
| --- | --- |

viii.

ensuring that food can be produced in all parts of the EU.

| 1.4. | The EESC welcomes the ‘Contingency plan for ensuring food supply and food security in times of crisis’ and the proposed creation of a European Food Security Crisis preparedness and response Mechanism (EFSCM), and recommends that these provisions be integrated into a comprehensive food policy (3). The EESC asks for an active role in the dedicated group of experts. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

2.   Introduction

| 2.1. | The EESC has been the first EU institution to call for a comprehensive food policy in the EU, with the aim of nurturing healthy diets from sustainable food systems, linking agriculture to nutrition and ecosystem services, and ensuring supply chains that safeguard public health for all sections of European society (4). Such a policy, now reflected in the Farm to Fork (F2F) strategy, should improve consistency across food-related policy areas, raise awareness of the value of food and promote sustainable food systems. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | The European Green Deal (EGD), through the principles set out in the F2F strategy and the Biodiversity Strategy, offers an opportunity to reaffirm the ‘social food contract’ between the European Union (EU) and its citizens and to promote a fair, healthy and environmentally friendly food system in the context of the climate and environmental emergency. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | The COVID-19 pandemic has had unprecedented consequences for society and the economy (5). Across the EU, farmers and actors in the food chain have remained mobilised to maintain production and feed the population, despite the difficulties and obstacles encountered. The EU’s agri-food sector has shown resilience in providing safe and high-quality food, although there have been supply chain disruptions. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | The French National Food Council (NFC) adopted an opinion (No 89) in July 2021 entitled ‘Feedback from the Covid-19 crisis — Period of the first national lockdown in France’ (6). The opinion concludes that the outbreak of the COVID-19 crisis reinforced the need to develop a more systemic vision of food systems, through the implementation of the ‘One Health approach’ at all levels of the food supply chain. This integrated approach to health emphasizes the interactions between animals, humans and their environment. Because of the economic and social precariousness that it has sometimes caused or reinforced, the crisis has also highlighted strong inequalities concerning access to food that are incompatible with a sustainable food system, prompting a reflection on the right to food and food democracy. Access to healthy, legally-produced, affordable and accessible food for the whole population of the EU is crucial to fulfilling the goals of the Green Deal (7). The EESC considers the target of making 25 % of agricultural land in the EU organic by 2030 to be very ambitious (8) and calls for an EU-wide promotion strategy to reach it without forgetting that consumption needs to follow. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

| 2.5. | The crisis has also demonstrated that there is a need to step up coordination and improve contingency planning so to be prepared to deal with risks that may threaten EU food supply and food security. The aim is to avoid repeating the COVID-19 experience where coordination measures at EU level had to be taken on an ad hoc basis and developed on the spot. To address this objective, the Commission has recently published a Communication on a ‘Contingency plan for ensuring food supply and food security in times of crisis’ (9). It outlines areas for improvement that were identified in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, principles that should be adhered to in times of crisis, and the creation of an EFSCM. This includes the establishment of a dedicated group of experts involving public authorities from MS and non-EU countries as well as stakeholders. |
| --- | --- |

2.5.

| 2.6. | According to the FAO definition, a sustainable food system ‘is a food system that delivers food security and nutrition for all in such a way that the economic, social and environmental bases to generate food security and nutrition for future generations are not compromised’ (10). The F2F strategy must take into account the consequences of the crisis, but also provide the necessary guarantees to ensure food security in the EU. The EU food systems should ‘guarantee the quantity and quality of supply to the populations, by supporting the competitiveness of the food sector and by considering the challenges of sustainability’. It should also support social innovation. |
| --- | --- |

2.6.

| 2.7. | The EC’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) published, in August 2021, a report entitled ‘Modelling environmental and climate ambitions in the agricultural sector with the CAPRI model’ (11), which simulates the impact on the EU agricultural sector and markets of some of the quantified objectives included in the F2F and biodiversity strategies (reduction of use of plant protection products, reduction of nutrient losses, increase of ecological areas in organic farming and increase in areas of interest). It appears that these objectives could lead to a reduction of between 10 % and 15 % in EU production, a decrease in farmers’ income, an increase in prices and a parallel increase in imports. The results of this report highlight the importance of jointly considering the agricultural and food transition. As stated in the F2F strategy, a reduction of food loss and waste could prevent such developments. An efficient distribution of the available food resources could be an appropriate instrument. |
| --- | --- |

2.7.

| 2.8. | The evolution of diets is an integral part of the transition of the agricultural and food system as a whole, as are other policies such as trade, competition, health, education, environment and consumers’ policies. |
| --- | --- |

2.8.

| 2.9. | The French Presidency of the EU Council has asked the EESC to prepare an exploratory opinion addressing in particular:






  — | levers to be used at EU level to safeguard the competitiveness of European producers, with a view to ensuring both European food security and affordable prices for consumers; |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.9.

—

levers to be used at EU level to safeguard the competitiveness of European producers, with a view to ensuring both European food security and affordable prices for consumers;

| — | levers that can help reduce dependence on inputs, including synthetic inputs, and improve the EU’s protein autonomy, within a framework to support the transformation of the agricultural sector and with a view to a sustainable transition of European food systems. |
| --- | --- |

—

levers that can help reduce dependence on inputs, including synthetic inputs, and improve the EU’s protein autonomy, within a framework to support the transformation of the agricultural sector and with a view to a sustainable transition of European food systems.

3.   Levers at EU level to safeguard the competitiveness of European producers, with a view to ensuring both European food security (and sustainability) and affordable prices for consumers

| 3.1. | As mentioned in previous EESC opinions, in order for a comprehensive European food policy to be truly relevant for European consumers, it is essential that the price and quality of food produced sustainably in the EU is competitive. This means that the European agri-food sector is able to deliver food for the consumers at prices that include extra costs for criteria such as sustainability, animal welfare, food safety and nutritional value, but also a fair return to the farmers, and at the same time, maintains its position as the preferred choice for the vast majority of consumers (12). |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

| 3.2. | With the above definitions of food security, sustainable food system and competitiveness in mind, maintaining the competitiveness of European operators and fair value chains should result in fair remuneration for farmers, encouraging or recognising their virtuous practices. Beyond its nurturing role, the food system provides a real solution to the climate challenge, in particular by adapting production systems, storing carbon in the soil, soil and agroecological infrastructures, natural filtration of drinking water, as well as increasing and maintaining biodiversity. However, in the F2F Strategy, the European Commission (EC) proposes few concrete actions to strengthen the agri-food sector and the income of primary producers, and none of these actions strengthen the competitiveness of the sector. These key issues should be at the heart of the implementation of the strategy, as they determine its success. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.

| 3.3. | Targeted research and development programmes and the development of knowledge transfer are essential for promoting quality and safeguarding productivity, while ensuring sustainability. Efforts must be focused on providing farmers with practical, accessible and cost-effective technological solutions (e.g. precision farming, decision-making tools, etc.) and tools to foster an agro-ecological and local production, including support to those groups who do not have knowledge on sustainable production. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.

| 3.4. | The EU must also ensure a strong commitment to implementing the fundamental rights of all the food chain workers (production, processing, distribution). In this sense, the EU should commit to the effective protection of the fundamental social rights of workers and, in particular, respect the relevant provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the relevant ILO conventions and recommendations. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.

| 3.5. | The following points could be considered as levers to safeguard the competitiveness of European producers, with a view to ensuring both European food security and sustainability, and affordable prices for consumers: |
| --- | --- |

3.5.

3.5.1.   Fostering an open strategic autonomy for food security and sustainability

| i. | The EESC has already proposed a definition of open strategic autonomy applied to food systems based on food production, workforce and fair trade, with the overarching aim of ensuring food security and sustainability for all EU citizens through a fair, healthy, sustainable and resilient food supply (13). |
| --- | --- |

i.

The EESC has already proposed a definition of open strategic autonomy applied to food systems based on food production, workforce and fair trade, with the overarching aim of ensuring food security and sustainability for all EU citizens through a fair, healthy, sustainable and resilient food supply (13).

| ii. | The EESC has also highlighted (14) that it is essential to harmonise production standards to avoid distortions of competition and to enable each country to produce staple foods. The WTO’s agricultural safeguard clauses, both the general clauses and those in bilateral agreements, must be improved according to various criteria, which the EESC lists in its opinion. The aim is to ensure fair competition and the sustainability of EU agri-food sectors, guaranteeing food sovereignty for the EU — producers and consumers alike. The COVID-19 pandemic has shone a light on the need for food sovereignty. The current clauses are ineffective because the time needed to implement them is too long. However, thanks to the digitalisation of the economy, data can be available within a few hours. Volumes and prices can now be monitored effectively, allowing for a rapid response. |
| --- | --- |

ii.

The EESC has also highlighted (14) that it is essential to harmonise production standards to avoid distortions of competition and to enable each country to produce staple foods. The WTO’s agricultural safeguard clauses, both the general clauses and those in bilateral agreements, must be improved according to various criteria, which the EESC lists in its opinion. The aim is to ensure fair competition and the sustainability of EU agri-food sectors, guaranteeing food sovereignty for the EU — producers and consumers alike. The COVID-19 pandemic has shone a light on the need for food sovereignty. The current clauses are ineffective because the time needed to implement them is too long. However, thanks to the digitalisation of the economy, data can be available within a few hours. Volumes and prices can now be monitored effectively, allowing for a rapid response.

| iii. | In particular, EU food systems should be more diversified; the agricultural workforce should be strengthened, especially by attracting young people and ensuring decent working conditions and income; trade policies should be aligned with EU food sustainability standards and competitiveness (15). |
| --- | --- |

iii.

In particular, EU food systems should be more diversified; the agricultural workforce should be strengthened, especially by attracting young people and ensuring decent working conditions and income; trade policies should be aligned with EU food sustainability standards and competitiveness (15).

3.5.2.   Ensuring reciprocity of standards by incorporating the Green Deal’s F2F and Biodiversity strategies as global sustainability standards in all future EU trade deals

| i. | The EESC proposed that all future EU trade deals should incorporate the EGD F2F and Biodiversity and Fit for 55 strategies as global standards on sustainability, recognising that integrating and implementing SDGs and higher standards into Multilateral trade deals is extremely challenging. Greater progress on SDGs and essential environmental and social standards seem possible in bilateral trade deals in the shorter term. It is well recognised that trade in agriculture plays a core role in realising most, if not all, SDGs and that the WTO has an important part to play in achieving this; that this would be far harder without an effective multilateral trade mechanism. Closing borders during crises usually makes the crisis worse and is not a solution. The EESC is of the opinion that the EU should implement legislation imposing due diligence on companies throughout their supply chains to identify, prevent and mitigate environmental and social risks, as well as human rights violations. The EU has to guarantee that trade deals will not externalise these problems and increase e.g. deforestation in other countries. All EU trade deals must respect EU sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) provisions and adhere to the precautionary principle (16). |
| --- | --- |

i.

The EESC proposed that all future EU trade deals should incorporate the EGD F2F and Biodiversity and Fit for 55 strategies as global standards on sustainability, recognising that integrating and implementing SDGs and higher standards into Multilateral trade deals is extremely challenging. Greater progress on SDGs and essential environmental and social standards seem possible in bilateral trade deals in the shorter term. It is well recognised that trade in agriculture plays a core role in realising most, if not all, SDGs and that the WTO has an important part to play in achieving this; that this would be far harder without an effective multilateral trade mechanism. Closing borders during crises usually makes the crisis worse and is not a solution. The EESC is of the opinion that the EU should implement legislation imposing due diligence on companies throughout their supply chains to identify, prevent and mitigate environmental and social risks, as well as human rights violations. The EU has to guarantee that trade deals will not externalise these problems and increase e.g. deforestation in other countries. All EU trade deals must respect EU sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) provisions and adhere to the precautionary principle (16).

| ii. | The EESC also stressed that without changes in EU trade policies, the objectives of the F2F Strategy will not be met (17). The F2F strategy includes important steps to strengthen the sustainability provisions of the EU’s bilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and the enforcement of those rules. However, more can be done to ensure compliance with international agreements, and to streamline the procedures for notifying and acting on breaches of sustainability commitments. As proposed by the EC and EP for other sectors and discussed in opinion NAT/834 (18), a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) for agricultural imports, shall be considered. |
| --- | --- |

ii.

The EESC also stressed that without changes in EU trade policies, the objectives of the F2F Strategy will not be met (17). The F2F strategy includes important steps to strengthen the sustainability provisions of the EU’s bilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and the enforcement of those rules. However, more can be done to ensure compliance with international agreements, and to streamline the procedures for notifying and acting on breaches of sustainability commitments. As proposed by the EC and EP for other sectors and discussed in opinion NAT/834 (18), a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) for agricultural imports, shall be considered.

| iii. | The EESC proposes the creation of an EU agency for the certification of imported production following EU sustainability standards. |
| --- | --- |

iii.

The EESC proposes the creation of an EU agency for the certification of imported production following EU sustainability standards.

| iv. | Furthermore, the EESC urges the EU to ensure true reciprocity of standards in preferential trade agreements, particularly regarding animal welfare, sustainability, and traceability from farm to fork (origin labelling of raw products, ingredients in processed products, and all food components), building on and mainstreaming what has been achieved in some recent bilateral provisions. It is also essential to find new sustainable methods that can be exploited by farmers, promoting sustainable practices and ensuring that new opportunities for sustainable production can be harnessed by small-scale farmers in the EU and developing countries. These reflections should be pursued in multilateral fora such as the UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS) and Codex Alimentarius, rather than be limited to bilateral negotiations, where farmer and civil society participation is limited, power imbalances are significant, and trade liberalisation remains the ultimate goal. The planned legislative framework on sustainable food systems can provide a starting point. It must serve to establish a clear definition of sustainable food systems, in line with existing EU definitions of environmental sustainability (19). |
| --- | --- |

iv.

Furthermore, the EESC urges the EU to ensure true reciprocity of standards in preferential trade agreements, particularly regarding animal welfare, sustainability, and traceability from farm to fork (origin labelling of raw products, ingredients in processed products, and all food components), building on and mainstreaming what has been achieved in some recent bilateral provisions. It is also essential to find new sustainable methods that can be exploited by farmers, promoting sustainable practices and ensuring that new opportunities for sustainable production can be harnessed by small-scale farmers in the EU and developing countries. These reflections should be pursued in multilateral fora such as the UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS) and Codex Alimentarius, rather than be limited to bilateral negotiations, where farmer and civil society participation is limited, power imbalances are significant, and trade liberalisation remains the ultimate goal. The planned legislative framework on sustainable food systems can provide a starting point. It must serve to establish a clear definition of sustainable food systems, in line with existing EU definitions of environmental sustainability (19).

3.5.3.   Promoting the value of food

| i. | In 2019, according to the latest figures published by Eurostat, the part of the household budget devoted to food and non-alcoholic beverages amounted to 13 % of total consumption expenditure. This constitutes a significant drop from what it was at the start of the CAP. Variable according to the country, it constitutes the third category of expenditure of EU households after the ‘housing, water, electricity and fuels’ category, which represented 23,5 %, and the ‘transport’ category which represented 13,1 %. At the same time, the increase in the level of world obesity has been called an ‘epidemic’ by the WHO. In 2017, obesity affected 17 % of adults in the EU. More broadly, 52 % of Europeans were overweight or obese, which means one in two adults and nearly one in three children. Therefore, Europe is following global trends, with an increase in processed foods, but also fatty, sweet and salty foods. |
| --- | --- |

i.

In 2019, according to the latest figures published by Eurostat, the part of the household budget devoted to food and non-alcoholic beverages amounted to 13 % of total consumption expenditure. This constitutes a significant drop from what it was at the start of the CAP. Variable according to the country, it constitutes the third category of expenditure of EU households after the ‘housing, water, electricity and fuels’ category, which represented 23,5 %, and the ‘transport’ category which represented 13,1 %. At the same time, the increase in the level of world obesity has been called an ‘epidemic’ by the WHO. In 2017, obesity affected 17 % of adults in the EU. More broadly, 52 % of Europeans were overweight or obese, which means one in two adults and nearly one in three children. Therefore, Europe is following global trends, with an increase in processed foods, but also fatty, sweet and salty foods.

| ii. | Several major levers can be used to deal with this situation: the EESC highlights that a common EU food labelling approach reflecting the Sustainable Dietary Guidelines would improve transparency and discourage the use of unnecessarily cheap raw materials that are both unhealthy and unsustainable (e.g. trans fats, palm oil and excess sugars). Consumers would benefit from extensions to food labelling, to include environmental and social aspects. This would help drive consumers’ choices towards healthier and more sustainable options (20). |
| --- | --- |

ii.

Several major levers can be used to deal with this situation: the EESC highlights that a common EU food labelling approach reflecting the Sustainable Dietary Guidelines would improve transparency and discourage the use of unnecessarily cheap raw materials that are both unhealthy and unsustainable (e.g. trans fats, palm oil and excess sugars). Consumers would benefit from extensions to food labelling, to include environmental and social aspects. This would help drive consumers’ choices towards healthier and more sustainable options (20).

| iii. | Price is certainly a strong consumer driver, even more so in times of crises, but quality is just as important, sometimes more according to some surveys. Consumers must bear in mind that the requirements that EU farmers meet, if only through the regulatory base, are higher than those outside the EU. These requirements are guarantees for the quality, health, safety and sustainability of our productions. |
| --- | --- |

iii.

Price is certainly a strong consumer driver, even more so in times of crises, but quality is just as important, sometimes more according to some surveys. Consumers must bear in mind that the requirements that EU farmers meet, if only through the regulatory base, are higher than those outside the EU. These requirements are guarantees for the quality, health, safety and sustainability of our productions.

3.5.4.   Ensuring fair prices and banning unfair trading practices

| i. | A truly functioning food supply chain is as strong as its weakest link, and, for far too long, the weakest link has been the farmer. The EU Directive on UTPs in the food supply chain (21) is an important step forward (22). For the first time, an agreement on binding rules to regulate certain unfair trading practices has been reached. The Directive aims to provide more protection for EU farmers, their producer organisations and retail suppliers. It is only through a binding legislative framework that the balance of power in the food supply chain can be achieved. The organisation of sectors and farmers is also an important condition, all with the aim of bringing quality food products to the consumer. Ultimately, it must be ensured that all those involved in food production can earn fair and adequate incomes and that consumers are offered quality and healthy products at reasonable prices. |
| --- | --- |

i.

A truly functioning food supply chain is as strong as its weakest link, and, for far too long, the weakest link has been the farmer. The EU Directive on UTPs in the food supply chain (21) is an important step forward (22). For the first time, an agreement on binding rules to regulate certain unfair trading practices has been reached. The Directive aims to provide more protection for EU farmers, their producer organisations and retail suppliers. It is only through a binding legislative framework that the balance of power in the food supply chain can be achieved. The organisation of sectors and farmers is also an important condition, all with the aim of bringing quality food products to the consumer. Ultimately, it must be ensured that all those involved in food production can earn fair and adequate incomes and that consumers are offered quality and healthy products at reasonable prices.

3.5.5.   Aligning food business practices and operations with the SDGs (23)

| i. | The EGD and the EU recovery plan show the need to decouple economic growth from unsustainable practices. The EU Council’s decision on climate targets for 2030 demonstrates that the EU can play a leading role in this area. However, this must be done in the broader context of the SDGs. Food business practices and operations aligned with the SDGs are an essential link to the success of the goals, by setting up these objectives at the heart of the strategies (through activities and ambitious goals, by evaluation of the impacts, and by the transparent communication of results) (24). |
| --- | --- |

i.

The EGD and the EU recovery plan show the need to decouple economic growth from unsustainable practices. The EU Council’s decision on climate targets for 2030 demonstrates that the EU can play a leading role in this area. However, this must be done in the broader context of the SDGs. Food business practices and operations aligned with the SDGs are an essential link to the success of the goals, by setting up these objectives at the heart of the strategies (through activities and ambitious goals, by evaluation of the impacts, and by the transparent communication of results) (24).

3.5.6.   Ensuring the structured involvement and participation of civil society and of all stakeholders across the food supply chain, including through a European Food Policy Council (25)
  – fostering cooperation rather than competition

| i. | The EESC has long advocated for a society-wide approach, including more participatory tools, to ensure that civil society — and in particular young people — can become more involved and participate in the decision-making process on sustainability. This co-construction can be done through a European Food Policy Council, which the EESC strongly encourages. |
| --- | --- |

i.

The EESC has long advocated for a society-wide approach, including more participatory tools, to ensure that civil society — and in particular young people — can become more involved and participate in the decision-making process on sustainability. This co-construction can be done through a European Food Policy Council, which the EESC strongly encourages.

4.   Levers that can help reduce dependence on inputs, including synthetic inputs, and improve the EU’s protein autonomy

4.1.   
  Reducing dependence on input, in particular synthetic inputs

| 4.1.1. | As explained in the EP report on the farm input supply chain: structure and implications, the high volatility of agricultural raw materials and agricultural input prices has fuelled agricultural income insecurity and hampered long-term investments by farmers. At the same time, farmers are sorely lacking tools and alternatives, as a result of research that does not cover these subjects enough. There is an important need for solid mobilisation and financial investment on agroecology, research into new resistant varieties, new biocontrol methods and precision farming, for example. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.1.

| 4.1.2. | Regarding antibiotics in animal production, notable efforts should be recalled, as the European Medicines Agency did, highlighting a drop in sales of veterinary antibiotics by 32,5 % between 2011 and 2017. The target set by Europe to reduce the use of antibiotics in animals by an additional 50 % could have serious consequences for animal health and welfare and could compromise food safety. There is a real awareness from farmers and veterinarians, who promote, with the support of the governments, an appropriate and reasoned use of antibiotics, which should be maintained. Efficient and affordable alternatives to antibiotics should be developed and offered, as current levels of antibiotics use also give rise to concern. The EESC fully supports the delegated act proposed by the EC within the framework of Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council (26), which provides for reserving certain antimicrobials for human medicine. Three tools are essential:






  — | investing in animal welfare (more space by animal); |
| --- | --- | --- |

4.1.2.

—

investing in animal welfare (more space by animal);

| — | strengthening prevention through vaccination and self-vaccination (27); |
| --- | --- |

—

strengthening prevention through vaccination and self-vaccination (27);

| — | maintaining and ensuring access to food supplements. |
| --- | --- |

—

maintaining and ensuring access to food supplements.

| 4.1.3. | In the F2F Strategy, the EC promotes the reduction of the use of plant protection products and antibiotics and the reduction of nutrient losses due to excess fertilisation, with a view to improving environmental protection, protecting health, increasing the surface area in organic farming and combating antibiotic resistance. Biostimulants can offer sustainable alternatives to synthetic PPPs (Plant Protection Products) and EU regulators should allow SMEs to develop and register such products. Beyond the negative environmental and health impacts of the unsustainable use of farm inputs, there is also an economic rationale in reducing farm dependency on inputs, including synthetic inputs and fossil fuels, provided there are efficient, robust and resilient alternatives. Increase in the cost of inputs would directly affect production costs and either undermines farm income or, if it can be passed on downstream, the price of agricultural and food products. The EESC highlights the need to minimize input per kg produced (chemical input, labour, petroleum, energy, surface, number of animals, etc.). Moreover, the EESC insists on the need to maximize the presence of agroecological infrastructures in our productive ecosystems, to benefit from their many services and, in particular, from the activity of crop auxiliaries located there. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.3.

4.2.   
  Improving the EU’s protein autonomy

| 4.2.1. | The EU has a major deficit in plant proteins, importing most of what the EU agricultural sector needs, in particular feed material such as soybeans. Despite the increase in value of its agricultural production and export, the EU was a net importer of calories in 2018 (15 % dependence on imports). The high level of production of dairy products and meat is made possible thanks to massive imports of protein crops (soybeans and soybean cakes in particular) from the American continent. Dependence on imported food has its roots in post-war trade agreements between the EU and the US. The US accepted protection for EU wheat and dairy markets, and in return, US corn and soybean products were exempted by the EU from tariffs. As a result, oilseeds and meals entered the EU at world market prices. While domestic soybean production has stagnated at a very low level due to unprofitable economic margins for non-GMO soybeans and an unsuitable climate in Northern Europe, imports of soybeans and soybean meal have increased massively (+ 49 % and + 87 % between 1986 and 2013). |
| --- | --- |

4.2.1.

| 4.2.2. | Improving the EU’s protein autonomy is desirable from all points of view. Imports of soybeans from third countries can be responsible for deforestation, forest degradation and the destruction of natural ecosystems in certain producing countries. The development of legumes with high protein content in the Union would limit the use of imports and thus have a positive impact on the climate and the environment. At the same time, cultivating legumes promotes biodiversity and reduces the use of nitrogen fertilizers. Finally, improving the autonomy of plant protein polyculture-rearing systems reduces the exposure of farms to the volatility of the world prices of these raw materials needed for animal feed. |
| --- | --- |

4.2.2.

| 4.2.3. | The EP adopted a report in April 2018 calling for a European strategy to promote European protein crops (28), and the EC published a report on the development of plant proteins in the EU at the end of 2018 (29), also called the ‘European protein plan’. The EC has recently published plans to halt imports of certain products if their production causes illegal logging. |
| --- | --- |

4.2.3.

| 4.2.4. | In the F2F strategy, the EC highlighted the need to foster much more EU-grown plant proteins and increase the availability and source of alternative proteins such as microbial, marine and insect-based proteins. Moreover, alternative feed materials such as insects, marine feed stocks (e.g. algae, seaweed) and by-products from the bio-economy (e.g. fish waste) can play an important role in the transition to a sustainable protein autonomy. Promoting an evolution in the daily diets of EU society is a key point. This protein diversification should be done in favour of raw and local agricultural products, in order to promote territorial dynamics on vegetable proteins. Otherwise, the risk is to increase imports and supplies of processed products which are presented as meat substitutes, and which are often nutritionally inadequate (30). |
| --- | --- |

4.2.4.

| 4.2.5. | Developing plant protein production in the EU can bring not only economic benefits for farmers and producers of food and animal feed, but also a wide range of environmental and climatic advantages. In particular, protein crops contribute to fixing the atmosphere’s nitrogen in the soil and therefore play an important role in a more sustainable nitrogen cycle. On the other hand, farmers again face a significant lack of applied research on resistant, sufficient yielding and adapted varieties. |
| --- | --- |

4.2.5.

| 4.2.6. | The following points could be considered as levers to improve the EU protein autonomy:






  i. | Enhancing the production of oilseed and oilseed cake. With the primary objective of food production, the valuation of oilseeds is based on the valuation of both oil and cakes, and cannot be dissociated. This makes it possible to enhance the sustainable production of food and energy. The availability of European rapeseed is cause for concern in this regard: from a level of 3,8 million tons of pure protein during the 2017/2018 harvest to 2,66 million tons of pure protein during the 2020/2021 harvest. Such evolutions are reflected in the import of seeds and meals, mainly soybeans. The drop in volume of European rapeseed is the result of both unfavourable climatic conditions and difficulties in cultivating crops with the increase in regulatory constraints and the reduction in the means of production available. Producers outside Europe have significant competitive advantages in this context, such as the use of selection techniques, tolerant varieties to herbicides etc. Mirror clauses are essential in this context. |
| --- | --- | --- |

4.2.6.

i.

Enhancing the production of oilseed and oilseed cake. With the primary objective of food production, the valuation of oilseeds is based on the valuation of both oil and cakes, and cannot be dissociated. This makes it possible to enhance the sustainable production of food and energy. The availability of European rapeseed is cause for concern in this regard: from a level of 3,8 million tons of pure protein during the 2017/2018 harvest to 2,66 million tons of pure protein during the 2020/2021 harvest. Such evolutions are reflected in the import of seeds and meals, mainly soybeans. The drop in volume of European rapeseed is the result of both unfavourable climatic conditions and difficulties in cultivating crops with the increase in regulatory constraints and the reduction in the means of production available. Producers outside Europe have significant competitive advantages in this context, such as the use of selection techniques, tolerant varieties to herbicides etc. Mirror clauses are essential in this context.

| ii. | Organising and supporting the protein sector to promote production and convince farmers, in particular through an ambitious CAP. The CAP already provides a series of measures which directly or indirectly have encouraged plant protein production in the EU in recent years, but a more strategic and ambitious approach is needed. The CAP budget is not sufficient to make up for the economics that are against plant protein production in Europe. A global increase of the CAP budget would be necessary, accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

ii.

Organising and supporting the protein sector to promote production and convince farmers, in particular through an ambitious CAP. The CAP already provides a series of measures which directly or indirectly have encouraged plant protein production in the EU in recent years, but a more strategic and ambitious approach is needed. The CAP budget is not sufficient to make up for the economics that are against plant protein production in Europe. A global increase of the CAP budget would be necessary, accordingly.

| iii. | Relying on research:






  a. | to optimise the protein intake in livestock feed and highlight the role of pastures/clovers as an important source of protein for ruminants; |
| --- | --- | --- |

iii.

Relying on research:

a.

to optimise the protein intake in livestock feed and highlight the role of pastures/clovers as an important source of protein for ruminants;

| b. | to identify the role seafood may play, e.g. farmed fish and seafood generate a lower carbon footprint than animal production on land, and sequester carbon. Seaweed snacks are already available on the market. However, this takes up a lot of minerals like iron, and therefore care should be taken not to upset the balance in waters. Thus, aquaculture can play an important role in the protein autonomy of the EU through the production of sustainable foods and animals feeds, and the development of new bioproducts such as food additives and new materials based on algae and other marine organisms. Furthermore, the blue economy has an ever-increasing potential in enhancing the EU economy, quality employment and people’s welfare in various locations, with specific benefits for coastal and rural areas. |
| --- | --- |

b.

to identify the role seafood may play, e.g. farmed fish and seafood generate a lower carbon footprint than animal production on land, and sequester carbon. Seaweed snacks are already available on the market. However, this takes up a lot of minerals like iron, and therefore care should be taken not to upset the balance in waters. Thus, aquaculture can play an important role in the protein autonomy of the EU through the production of sustainable foods and animals feeds, and the development of new bioproducts such as food additives and new materials based on algae and other marine organisms. Furthermore, the blue economy has an ever-increasing potential in enhancing the EU economy, quality employment and people’s welfare in various locations, with specific benefits for coastal and rural areas.

| c. | Farmers need to benefit more from knowledge transfer and awareness raising on the cultivation and production of legumes at several levels: yield, choice of varieties, pest attacks, solutions etc. |
| --- | --- |

c.

Farmers need to benefit more from knowledge transfer and awareness raising on the cultivation and production of legumes at several levels: yield, choice of varieties, pest attacks, solutions etc.

| iv. | Promoting extensive livestock breeding (31) as a way of producing sustainable animal proteins, while fostering the carbon sink potential of pastures and the associated agroecological infrastructures. Extensive and silvo-agriculture can enhance resilience against forest fires. |
| --- | --- |

iv.

Promoting extensive livestock breeding (31) as a way of producing sustainable animal proteins, while fostering the carbon sink potential of pastures and the associated agroecological infrastructures. Extensive and silvo-agriculture can enhance resilience against forest fires.

| 4.2.7. | The EESC is planning to develop a proposal for a strategy to achieve a sustainable protein and plant oil open autonomy in the EU by analysing the potential of EU-grown plants, EU aquaculture, extensive livestock breeding, and other protein sources such as insects, algae and urban food systems. |
| --- | --- |

4.2.7.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  EESC own initiative opinion on Civil society’s contribution to the development of a comprehensive food policy in the EU (OJ C 129, 11.4.2018, p.18).

1

Civil society’s contribution to the development of a comprehensive food policy in the EU

(2)  See definition of competitiveness in point 3.1.

2

(3)  EESC own initiative opinion on Civil society's contribution to the development of a comprehensive food policy in the EU (OJ C 129, 11.4.2018, p. 18).

3

(4)  EESC own initiative opinion on Civil society's contribution to the development of a comprehensive food policy in the EU (OJ C 129, 11.4.2018, p. 18).

4

(5)  European GDP fell by 11,8 % in the 2nd quarter of 2020 (Eurostat).

5

(6)  https://cna-alimentation.fr/avis/tous-les-avis/

6

(7)  EESC opinion on From farm to fork: a sustainable food strategy (OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 268).

7

From farm to fork: a sustainable food strategy

(8)  EESC opinion on an Action Plan for the development of EU organic production (OJ C 517, 22.12.2021, p. 114).

8

Action Plan for the development of EU organic production

(9)  https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/key-policies/common-agricultural-policy/market-measures/agri-food-supply-chain/contingency-plan_en

9

(10)  https://www.fao.org/3/ca2079en/CA2079EN.pdf

10

(11)  https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC121368/pubsy_jrc_technical_report_-_capri_environmental_and_climatic_ambition_2.pdf

11

(12)  EESC opinion on From farm to fork: a sustainable food strategy (OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 268).

12

From farm to fork: a sustainable food strategy

(13)  EESC own initiative opinion on Strategic autonomy and food security and sustainability (OJ C 105, 4.3.2022, p. 56).

13

Strategic autonomy and food security and sustainability

(14)  EESC own initiative opinion on Introduction of safeguard measures for agricultural products in trade agreements (OJ C 364, 28.10.2020, p. 49).

14

on Introduction of safeguard measures for agricultural products in trade agreements

(15)  EESC own initiative opinion on Strategic autonomy and food security and sustainability (OJ C 105, 4.3.2022, p. 56).

15

Strategic autonomy and food security and sustainability

(16)  EESC own initiative opinion on Compatibility of EU trade policy with the EGD (OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 66).

16

Compatibility of EU trade policy with the EGD

(17)  EESC opinion on From farm to fork: a sustainable food strategy (OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 268).

17

From farm to fork: a sustainable food strategy

(18)  OJ C 152, 6.4.2022, p. 181.

18

(19)  EESC opinion on From farm to fork: a sustainable food strategy (OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 268).

19

From farm to fork: a sustainable food strategy

(20)  EESC own-initiative opinion on Promoting healthy and sustainable diets in the EU (OJ C 190, 5.6.2019, p. 9).

20

Promoting healthy and sustainable diets in the EU

(21)  OJ L 111, 25.4.2019, p. 59.

21

(22)  EESC opinion on Towards a Fair Food Supply Chain (Exploratory opinion) (OJ C 517, 22.12.2021, p. 38).

22

Towards a Fair Food Supply Chain

(23)  EESC own-initiative opinion on Aligning food business strategies and operations with the SDGs for a sustainable post-COVID-19 recovery (not yet published in the OJ).

23

(24)  EESC own-initiative opinion on Aligning food business strategies and operations with the SDGs for a sustainable post-COVID-19 recovery (not yet published in the OJ).

24

(25)  EESC own initiative opinion on Civil society's contribution to the development of a comprehensive food policy in the EU (OJ C 129, 11.4.2018, p. 18); EESC opinion on From farm to fork: a sustainable food strategy (OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 268).

25

(26)  Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on veterinary medicinal products and repealing Directive 2001/82/EC (OJ L 4, 7.1.2019, p. 43).

26

(27)  Vaccine prepared from pathogens isolated from a sick animal or a healthy animal of the same farm and intended for administration to that sick animal or to animals of that farm.

27

(28)  https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0121_EN.html

28

(29)  COM(2018) 757 final.

29

(30)  https://www.clcv.org/storage/app/media/Dossier%20presse.pdf

30

(31)  EESC information report on Benefits of extensive livestock farming and organic fertilizers in the context of the European Green Deal.

31

Benefits of extensive livestock farming and organic fertilizers in the context of the European Green Deal

---

III Preparatory acts

European Economic and Social Committee

566th plenary session of the European Economic and Social Committee – Interactio, 19.1.2022–20.1.2022

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/81 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/81

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2019/631 as regards strengthening the CO2 emission performance standards for new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles in line with the Union’s increased climate ambition

[COM(2021) 556 final — 2021/0197(COD)]

(2022/C 194/11)

| Rapporteur: | Dirk BERGRATH |
| --- | --- |
| Co-rapporteur: | Bruno CHOIX |

Rapporteur:

Dirk BERGRATH

Co-rapporteur:

Bruno CHOIX

| Referral | European Parliament, 13.9.2021
  Council, 20.9.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 192(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Single Market, Production and Consumption |
| Adopted in section | 13.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 237/1/6 |

Referral

European Parliament, 13.9.2021

Council, 20.9.2021

Legal basis

Article 192(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Single Market, Production and Consumption

Adopted in section

13.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

19.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

237/1/6

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | The EESC reiterates its support for the European Green Deal objective of making the EU the first climate-neutral continent by 2050. Furthermore, the EESC underlines the importance of the EU Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy, which has set a series of milestones for achieving this ambitious objective to make transport fit for a climate-neutral Europe in 2050, promoting an ‘integrated system approach’ (1). |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | The EESC shares the view that new registrations of cars and in vans in the European Union should make it possible to achieve a 100 % reduction in EU fleet-wide emissions by 2035. The EESC supports the proposed EU fleet-wide CO2 emission reduction targets for new passenger cars by 55 % (compared to the 2021 target) and generally also supports the 50 % reduction target for light commercial vehicles as from 2030. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | The EESC stresses that fleet limits provide a very powerful and efficient impetus for technological change in the industry. In line with its previous opinion (2), the EESC notes that, despite all of the benefits, the ‘tailpipe’ approach has to be complemented by other policy instruments. The Fit for 55 Package must ensure a life-cycle approach and avoid road transport electrification leading to a shift of emissions upstream in the value chain. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | The EESC strongly reaffirms that individual mobility must remain accessible and affordable for all, especially for commuters without access to quality public transport or other mobility solutions (3). |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | The automotive sector is of strategic importance for the European economy. Car manufacturing (assembly and suppliers) employs 2,6 million workers and generates 900 000 jobs in supplying industries, which together represent 11,6 % of EU manufacturing employment. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | With the dramatic acceleration of the decarbonisation pace that the Fit for 55 package will entail, mainly in the automotive industry, additional resources — for example, in an extended Just Transition Fund (JTF) — will be needed to cope with the social consequences of emission-reduction measures in regions dependent on automotive supply chains. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | The EESC reaffirms its call for an evaluation to include the state of play regarding the qualification and (re)training of staff, as well as an updated analysis of the areas in which (additional) action is required in order to further improve the skills and qualifications of employees in the automotive industry for the structural transition (4). The EESC reiterates that these aspects should be included in the proposed governance and monitoring provisions. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

| 1.8. | The EESC is concerned that unless the charging infrastructure needed to support the transition is in place, the reduction targets will be hard to achieve. Charging infrastructure has to be rolled out where people live, work and do their daily activities. |
| --- | --- |

1.8.

| 1.9. | Renewable and low-carbon fuels, as well as e-fuels, might have a certain role to play in decarbonising road transport, especially for the existing fleet and for hard-to-electrify parts, but robust sustainability standards must be applied. |
| --- | --- |

1.9.

2.   Context of the proposal

| 2.1. | The European Green Deal Communication (5) launched a new growth strategy for the EU that aims to transform the EU into a fair and prosperous society, with a modern, resource-efficient and competitive economy. It reaffirms the Commission’s ambition to increase its climate targets and make Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | This objective is set out in the Communication ‘A Clean Planet for all — A European strategic long-term vision for a prosperous, modern, competitive and climate-neutral economy’ (6). |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | Based on a comprehensive impact assessment, the Commission’s Communication on Stepping up Europe’s 2030 climate ambition (7) proposed to raise the EU’s ambition and put forward a comprehensive plan to increase the European Union’s binding target for 2030 to at least 55 % net emission reduction, in a responsible way. The 2030 target is in line with the Paris Agreement objective to keep the global temperature increase to well below 2 oC and to pursue efforts to keep it to 1,5 oC. The European Council endorsed the new EU binding target for 2030 at its meeting of December 2020 (8). In order to deliver this increased level of ambition for 2030, the Commission has reviewed the climate and energy legislation currently in place, which is expected only to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 % by 2030 and by 60 % by 2050. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | This ‘fit for 55’ legislative package, as announced in the Commission’s Climate Target Plan (9), is the most comprehensive building block in the efforts to implement the ambitious new 2030 climate target, and all economic sectors and policies, including road transport, will need to contribute to this. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

| 2.5. | The automotive industry is of key importance for the EU economy and accounts for over 7 % of the EU’s GDP, providing jobs — directly or indirectly, to 12,6 million Europeans. EU automotive investment in R & D amounts to EUR 60,9 billion annually. |
| --- | --- |

2.5.

| 2.6. | The Commission’s Strategy for Sustainable and Smart Mobility (10) addresses the broader challenges of the transition to zero-emission mobility and sets out a roadmap for putting European transport firmly on the right track for a sustainable and smart future. |
| --- | --- |

2.6.

| 2.7. | The Strategy’s accompanying Action Plan includes policies aimed, among other things, at boosting the uptake of zero-emission vehicles and related infrastructure. The shift toward zero-emission vehicles will prevent pollution and improve the health of our citizens; this also supports the Zero Pollution Ambition of the European Green Deal, as articulated in the Zero Pollution Action Plan (11). |
| --- | --- |

2.7.

| 2.8. | The CO2 emission standards for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles are key drivers for reducing CO2 emissions in the sector, as shown in the Communication on Stepping up Europe’s 2030 climate ambition. The general objectives of this proposal are to contribute to achieving climate neutrality by 2050 and to this end, in line with the European Climate Law, to contribute to reaching at least 55 % net greenhouse gas emission reductions by 2030 compared to 1990. |
| --- | --- |

2.8.

| 2.9. | The CO2 emission standards, supplying new zero-emission vehicles to the market, are also a complementary measure to the Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (12) (Renewable Energy Directive), which will decarbonise the production of electricity used in electric vehicles and incentivise the uptake of renewable and low carbon fuels for the combustion engine vehicles currently in use. There are also important synergies between CO2 emission standards and a strengthened emissions trading system (ETS) (13) and the Renewable Energy Directive. |
| --- | --- |

2.9.

3.   General comments

| 3.1. | The EESC reiterates its support for the European Green Deal objective of making the EU the first climate-neutral continent by 2050, and its support for the revised 2030 emission reduction targets, as set out in the Committee’s opinion on the European Climate Law (14). |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

| 3.2. | Reducing the EU’s Greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55 % by 2030 will require significant additional efforts across all sectors of the economy. This is especially true for transport. The transport sector is among the priorities of the EU Green Deal, with the general objective being to deliver a 90 % reduction in transport greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Emissions related to road transport are responsible for 22 % of the EU’s total greenhouse gas emissions and for 27 % of its CO2 emissions (15). According to official data, emissions from road transport were 26,8 % higher in 2018 than they were in 1990 (16). More recently, emissions from new passenger cars increased for the third consecutive year in 2019, reaching 122,3 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometre (g CO2/km) (17). |
| --- | --- |

3.2.

| 3.3. | The EESC underlines the importance of the EU Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy, which has set a series of milestones to achieve this ambitious objective to make transport fit for a climate-neutral Europe in 2050. Building on previous policy documents, the Strategy rightly promotes an ‘integrated system approach’, relying on a portfolio of complementary instruments to transform transport. Emission standards have a key role to play but achieving the set targets will require additional efforts to roll out infrastructure, to ramp up decarbonised electricity production and to set up carbon price mechanisms for transport (18). |
| --- | --- |

3.3.

| 3.4. | The Regulation on CO2 emission standards for cars and light commercial vehicles is the cornerstone of the EU strategy to reduce emissions in the sector. The EESC points out that an in-depth revision of the Regulation on CO2 emissions from passenger cars and light commercial vehicles was completed in 2018 (19). The EESC acknowledges that this recent revision is, however, insufficient to reach the greenhouse gas emission reduction targets as established in the EU Climate Law. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.

| 3.5. | The automotive sector is of strategic importance for the European economy. Car manufacturing (assembly and suppliers) employs 2,6 million workers and generates 900 000 jobs in supplying industries, which together represent 11,6 % of EU manufacturing employment. In total, automotive-related activities employ 12,6 million people in Europe, meaning that the automotive sector is responsible for 6,6 % of all EU employment. The EU automotive industry generates EUR 76 bn of trade surplus annually and is responsible for 33 % of total R & D spending in the EU. Last but not least, the purchase and use of motor vehicles is a major source of taxation revenues for Member States, with Germany alone collecting almost EUR 100 bn annually (20). |
| --- | --- |

3.5.

| 3.6. | Reaching the 2030 emission reduction targets for road transport will require massive efforts to transform the automotive industry and replace the existing vehicle fleet. The uptake of electric vehicles in Europe is rapidly increasing in many Member States but is still limited, with electric cars representing only 3,5 % of total new car registrations in 2019, BEV and PHEV included, while electric cars only represent 1,2 % of the existing car fleet in the EU (21). Recent figures indicate a rapid extension of BEV and PHEV market shares with 9,8 %, and 9,1 % market share respectively in Q3 2021 (22). |
| --- | --- |

3.6.

| 3.7. | It must be borne in mind that the EU car industry will have to decarbonise in a context where it is struggling with a series of other drivers of structural changes that already significantly impact its workforce: the automation and robotisation of assembly lines entails productivity gains that will have an impact on the number of hours worked in the sector (23), the ongoing shortage of semiconductors has led to production losses, while the pandemic and its consequences have brought sales and production to historical downs. |
| --- | --- |

3.7.

| 3.8. | The EESC strongly reaffirms that individual mobility must remain accessible and affordable for all, especially for commuters without access to quality public transport or other mobility solutions (24). A significant barrier to BEV market growth is the high upfront purchase prices, driving greater depreciation costs for first owners, which determine the stock mix. However, various reports show that BEVs are already the most affordable option for consumers in many countries when total cost of ownership is taken into account (25). Keeping proportionate support measures and incentives will be essential in the coming years to bring benefits to second- and third-hand users, who will benefit the most from electrification. |
| --- | --- |

3.8.

| 3.9. | In May 2020, the European Commission proposed to set up an EUR 40 bn ‘Just Transition Fund’ to support regions depending on coal and CO2 intensive industries in their efforts to decarbonise. In the context of the EU budget and EU recovery negotiations, Member States agreed to dedicate EUR 17,5 bn to the JTF. With the dramatic acceleration of the decarbonisation pace that the Fit for 55 package will entail, mainly in the automotive industry, additional resources will be needed to cope with the social consequences of emission reduction measures in regions depending on automotive supply chains. |
| --- | --- |

3.9.

4.   Specific comments

| 4.1. | The EESC stresses that fleet limits provide a very powerful and efficient impetus for technological change in the industry. It is largely due to this regulatory impulse that the European automotive industry has set out on the road to emission-free vehicles. More ambitious fleet limits will help ensure that Europe can become the first climate-neutral continent by 2050. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.

| 4.2. | The EESC shares the view, that new registrations of cars and in vans in the European Union should make it possible to achieve a 100 % reduction in EU fleet-wide emissions by 2035. The EESC points out that this reduction target can only be achieved if all framework conditions are optimally interlinked and customers (throughout the European Union) can be convinced to switch to zero-emission vehicles. It is therefore important to roll out the necessary charging infrastructure where people live, work and carry out their daily activities, while making sure that this charging infrastructure is convenient for them. |
| --- | --- |

4.2.

| 4.3. | The EESC supports the proposed EU fleet-wide CO2 emission reduction targets for new passenger cars by 55 % (compared to the 2021 target) as from 2030. The EESC points out that, given the specific production and development cycles in the automotive industry, the necessary decisions in the industry to achieve this target must be taken now. |
| --- | --- |

4.3.

| 4.4. | While generally also supporting the 50 % reduction target for light commercial vehicles, the EESC draws attention to both the specific production and development cycle and the typical usage of these vehicles. The EESC is concerned that unless the charging infrastructure to support the transition is in place, the reduction targets will be hard to achieve and thus additional criteria might be needed. |
| --- | --- |

4.4.

| 4.5. | The EESC reaffirms its 2018 call for a mid-term review of the current regulation (originally due in 2024) to include the state of play regarding the qualification and (re)training of staff, as well as an updated analysis of the areas in which (additional) action is required in order to further improve the skills and qualifications of employees in the automotive industry for the structural transition (26). The EESC reiterates that these aspects should be included in the proposed governance and monitoring provisions, which must be based on Real Driving Emissions tests. |
| --- | --- |

4.5.

| 4.6. | The revision of the CO2 standards regulation must be based on technology neutrality, while bearing in mind that not all options offer high energy-efficiency performance. Even though electrification is clearly the leading option when it comes to decarbonising road transport, it might not be the most relevant option for heavier or long distance modes of transport. As stressed by the European Commission in its 2018 Communication ‘A Clean Planet for all’, a wide variety of technologies must be considered and the EU approach must be based on technology neutrality. Batteries, hydrogen, advanced biofuels, biomethane and e-liquids will have a role to play in decarbonising the transport system. The EESC supports the ‘technology neutrality’ principle and stresses the need to keep in the mobility mix all powertrains that meet the CO2 and emission standards in line with the Green Deal objectives. |
| --- | --- |

4.6.

| 4.7. | In line with its previous opinion (27), the EESC notes that, despite all of the benefits, the ‘tailpipe’ approach opted for in the draft regulation has to be complemented by other policy instruments. The Fit for 55 Package must ensure a life-cycle approach and avoid road transport electrification leading to a shift of emissions upstream in the value chain. The EU Emissions Trading System revision, as well as the Renewable Energy Directive, must ensure that the electrification of road transport and the decarbonisation of electricity production happen at the same pace. |
| --- | --- |

4.7.

| 4.8. | Current market uptake shows that the plug-in hybrid technology can act as an entry-point and transitional technology to help achieve the climate targets in the transport sector. However, it has to be ensured that hybrid vehicles are being used in purely electric mode for most of the time, with frequent charging. To counter the growing discussion of misleading labelling of PHEVs, measures should be taken swiftly to boost the proportion of ‘electric journeys’, including:






  — | The electrical range of PHEV should be designed to cover typical user behaviour. For cars, ranges of approximately 80 to 100 km in real operation and a charging capacity of 11 kW should be aimed for across all models. |
| --- | --- | --- |

4.8.

—

The electrical range of PHEV should be designed to cover typical user behaviour. For cars, ranges of approximately 80 to 100 km in real operation and a charging capacity of 11 kW should be aimed for across all models.

| — | The integration of digital services, information and intelligent operating strategies in the vehicle to support drivers in their electrical use. |
| --- | --- |

—

The integration of digital services, information and intelligent operating strategies in the vehicle to support drivers in their electrical use.

| — | The availability of On-Board Fuel Consumption Measurement (OBFCM) data via the (uniformly defined) OBD (On-board Diagnostics) II interface in compliance with data protection by the technical services. |
| --- | --- |

—

The availability of On-Board Fuel Consumption Measurement (OBFCM) data via the (uniformly defined) OBD (On-board Diagnostics) II interface in compliance with data protection by the technical services.

| — | The implementation of national incentives to use batteries (socially fair carbon-pricing schemes and the phasing-out of indirect fossil fuel subsidies such as untaxed fuel cards for employees using a company car). |
| --- | --- |

—

The implementation of national incentives to use batteries (socially fair carbon-pricing schemes and the phasing-out of indirect fossil fuel subsidies such as untaxed fuel cards for employees using a company car).

| 4.9. | Renewable and low-carbon fuels, as well as e-fuels, might have a certain role to play in decarbonising road transport, especially for the existing fleet and for hard-to-electrify parts, bearing in mind that these fuels will be needed as a priority to decarbonise parts of the transport system that are hard to electrify, such as aviation and maritime transport. In addition, EU legislation must ensure that robust sustainability standards will be applied. First, a life-cycle assessment must ensure that the carbon footprint is consistent with the objective of reaching climate neutrality in 2050. Secondly, even if limited, use of these alternative fuels must be in line with the UN SDGs and, as a result, crop biofuels, palm-and soy-based biofuels must be phased out. |
| --- | --- |

4.9.

| 4.10. | The EESC is in favour of removing the derogation for small-volume manufacturers, registering fewer than 10 000 cars or fewer than 22 000 vans yearly, as from 2030. A general niche market for vehicles not tied to emissions targets is not acceptable. However, the proposal lacks provision for hard-to-electrify special purpose cars. |
| --- | --- |

4.10.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  OJ C 286, 16.7.2021, p. 158.

1

(2)  OJ C 227, 28.6.2018, p. 52.

2

(3)  EESC opinion on The EU mobility strategy and EU industrial value chains: automotive eco-systems approach (own-initiative opinion), point 1.3 (OJ C 105, 4.3.2022, p. 26).

3

The EU mobility strategy and EU industrial value chains: automotive eco-systems approach

(4)  OJ C 227, 28.6.2018, p. 52, points 1.6 and 4.13.

4

(5)  COM(2019) 640 final.

5

(6)  COM(2018) 773 final.

6

(7)  COM(2020) 562 final.

7

(8)  European Council Conclusions 10-11 December 2020 EUCO 22/20 CO EUR 17 CONCL 8.

8

(9)  COM (2020/562) final.

9

(10)  COM (2020) 789 final.

10

(11)  COM (2021) 400 final, see also in this context Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe (OJ L 152, 11.6.2008, p. 1) and Directive (EU) 2016/2284 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2016 on the reduction of national emissions of certain atmospheric pollutants, amending Directive 2003/35/EC and repealing Directive 2001/81/EC (OJ L 344, 17.12.2016, p. 1).

11

(12)  Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328 21.12.2018, p. 82).

12

(13)  OJ L 275, 25.10.2003, p. 32.

13

(14)  OJ C 364, 28.10.2020, p. 143.

14

(15)  https://unfccc.int/documents/275968

15

(16)  https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/transport-emissions-of-greenhouse-gases-7/assessment

16

(17)  https://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/average-car-emissions-kept-increasing

17

(18)  OJ C 286, 16.7.2021, p. 158.

18

(19)  OJ C 227, 28.6.2018, p. 52.

19

(20)  ACEA figures 2021 https://www.acea.auto/files/ACEA_Pocket_Guide_2021-2022.pdf.

20

(21)  EU+UK, Norway, Iceland: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/proportion-of-vehicle-fleet-meeting-5/assessment; BEV 0,4 % and hybrids 0,8 %; ACEA 2021 Figures.

21

(22)  https://www.acea.auto/fuel-pc/fuel-types-of-new-cars-battery-electric-9-8-hybrid-20-7-and-petrol-39-5-market-share-in-q3-2021/

22

(23)  See Fraunhofer institute, ELAB 2.0 study.

23

(24)  EESC opinion on The EU mobility strategy and EU industrial value chains: automotive eco-systems approach (own-initiative opinion), point 1.3 (OJ C 105, 4.3.2022, p. 26).

24

(25)  https://www.beuc.eu/publications/beuc-x-2021-039_electric_cars_calculating_the_total_cost_of_ownership_for_consumers.pdf

25

(26)  OJ C 227, 28.6.2018, p. 52, points 1.6 and 4.13.

26

(27)  OJ C 227, 28.6.2018, p. 52.

27

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/87 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/87

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the 2030 Policy Programme ‘Path to the Digital Decade’

(COM(2021) 574 final — 2021/0293 (COD))

(2022/C 194/12)

Rapporteur:
  Violeta JELIĆ

Co-rapporteur:
  Philip VON BROCKDORFF

| Referral | European Parliament, 18.10.2021
  Council, 26.10.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 173(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Single Market, Production and Consumption |
| Adopted in section | 13.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 239/1/6 |

Referral

European Parliament, 18.10.2021

Council, 26.10.2021

Legal basis

Article 173(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Single Market, Production and Consumption

Adopted in section

13.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

19.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

239/1/6

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | COVID-19 has revealed the critical importance of technology for economic and health resilience, making the EU’s digital transformation and sovereignty a matter of existential importance. The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) therefore urges the EU to develop its digital sovereignty, which over the coming years is expected to be a crucial pillar of Europe’s path to economic, social and environmental development. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | The EESC highlights the fact that digital sovereignty must be based on global competitiveness, relying on solid cooperation between Member States, which is a necessary prerequisite for the EU to be a global standard-setter, including in the trustworthiness of technologies. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | The EESC stresses the need for the digital transformation to take place in a sustainable, human-centred and inclusive way. To this end, the EESC deems it crucial to guarantee the involvement of civil society representatives, including the social partners, consumers organisations and other concerned stakeholders, in shaping, implementing and monitoring the policy programme and related national roadmaps. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | Successful digital transformation requires excellence in technology and talent. Moreover, it requires a solid and comprehensive basis of digital skills and competences among all citizens. The EESC points out the need for specific attention to be paid to the people that are most vulnerable in terms of exposure to the digital gap, such as older people, persons with low-level qualifications, and persons with disabilities. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | Technological excellence rests on a strong industrial basis, intensive innovation and investment. The EESC highlights the importance of investment in digital infrastructure and the development of the single market in data as essential enablers of proper digital development in all regions of the EU, among both citizens and businesses. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | European companies need favourable conditions for innovation, investment and operation, compared to foreign competitors. While promoting innovative businesses, it must be ensured that all businesses, including micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises and social economy enterprises, are encouraged and so they are able to become involved in and benefit from progress. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | Being at the digital forefront requires cooperation between the private and public sectors. The EESC stresses the vital role of the public sector in digital development, through the digitalisation of public services and administration. This is a way to enhance not only the efficiency of these services but also to facilitate inclusive access to them. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

| 1.8. | The EESC considers multi-country projects as a valuable initiative aimed at promoting the EU’s excellence in digital technology and strengthening its global position. This initiative would also help find solutions to challenges that require more resources than is possible for an individual Member State, besides disseminating good practices across borders. The Committee also welcomes the idea of the European Digital Infrastructure Consortium (EDIC) as a tool to combine EU and national funding with private financing for the purposes of the programme. |
| --- | --- |

1.8.

| 1.9. | The EESC emphasises that multi-country projects should involve as many Member States as possible so as to support an interconnected, interoperable and secure Digital Single Market, and address any gaps in critical capacities across the EU. To this end, the EESC calls on the Commission to accelerate and steer projects in a way that ensures the best possible benefit from the point of view of the whole EU. |
| --- | --- |

1.9.

2.   General comments

| 2.1. | COVID-19 has revealed the critical importance of technology for economic and health resilience, making the EU’s digital transformation and sovereignty a matter of existential importance. Rising US-China tensions are an additional incentive for the EU to develop its own digital capabilities; such tension risks becoming a battleground in the struggle for technological and industrial supremacy. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | Against this background, it is necessary for the EU to take urgent action and develop its digital sovereignty, which over the coming years is expected to be a crucial pillar of Europe’s digitalisation and economic growth paths and also to affect its security and global position. The EESC believes that digital sovereignty would help boost the EU’s potential strengths and address strategic weaknesses in the sphere of technology. It could also become a game changer in the context of the single market and widen the use of open markets and supply chains to avoid over-reliance on proprietary systems. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | The challenge is considerable, as the EU needs to start taking the lead in technology in a situation where EU Member States currently lack a common position on technology issues or even a shared understanding of the strategic importance of digital technologies, such as broadband rollout or the application of AI. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | Digital transformation is also a matter of EU values and a way of using modern technologies to economically, socially and environmentally enhance sustainable development, including the creation of quality jobs and the transition to a circular and carbon-neutral economy. The EESC welcomes the emphasis on a human-centred and inclusive approach to digital transformation, with due regard for the interests of consumers, workers, entrepreneurs and society at large, including protection of privacy and data protection, security of information and communication technologies, and energy and material efficiency of digital systems. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

| 2.5. | The EESC welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a decision to establish a 2030 policy programme entitled ‘Path to the Digital Decade’ as part of the State of the Union 2021 address and as a follow-up to the communication on ‘The 2030 Digital Compass’ and the preceding digital strategy. The EESC has previously submitted its opinion on the communication (1). |
| --- | --- |

2.5.

| 2.6. | The EESC highlights the fact that digital sovereignty needs to be based on competitiveness that relies on solid cooperation between Member States, accompanied by the intrinsic involvement of civil society stakeholders, including businesses, workers, consumers, academia and other relevant stakeholders. Success in global competition, and avoiding protectionism and isolation, are a prerequisite for the EU to be a global standard-setter, including in the trustworthiness and human-centrism of technologies. This requires excellence in technology and talent. Moreover, it requires a solid and comprehensive basis of digital skills and competences among all citizens. |
| --- | --- |

2.6.

| 2.7. | Investment in digital infrastructure and the development of the single market in data are essential and necessary enablers of proper digital development in all regions of the EU. A rule-based and level playing field for digital activities is important at international level as well. At the same time, it is increasingly important to pay due attention to cybersecurity along whole value chains. |
| --- | --- |

2.7.

| 2.8. | Technological excellence rests on a strong industrial basis, intensive innovation and investment. European companies therefore need an overall business environment that provides them with favourable conditions compared to foreign competitors. While promoting innovative businesses, it must be ensured that all businesses, including micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises and social economy enterprises, are encouraged and supported to be able to get involved in and benefit from the progress. |
| --- | --- |

2.8.

| 2.9. | Being at the digital forefront requires cooperation between the private and public sectors. The EESC stresses the vital role of the public sector in digital development, through the digitalisation of public services and administration. This is a way to enhance not only the efficiency of services but also to facilitate inclusive access to them. |
| --- | --- |

2.9.

| 2.10. | Against the above backdrop, the EESC finds the four priority areas of action set up in the Digital Compass — skills, infrastructure, businesses, public sector — to be of high relevance in the digital transformation. The EESC also believes that concrete targets for each priority area help guide and follow progress. However, it is at least as important to create enabling and supportive conditions to implement the specific measures that are needed to achieve the targets. |
| --- | --- |

2.10.

| 2.11. | Financing is one of the central enablers of digital development. Both public and private financing play an important role in facilitating investment in research and innovation, education and training and technical infrastructure. The regulatory framework is another general factor shaping digital development. The EESC deems it important that regulation encourage innovation and investment in digitalisation, in alignment with human rights and environmental and climate objectives. |
| --- | --- |

2.11.

| 2.12. | The EESC believes cooperation and coordinated action between Member States to be vital in order to use resources more efficiently and to enable large-scale investments that cannot be made by individual countries only. Cooperation is also crucial for being at the digital forefront on a global scale. The EESC also agrees with the proposal to shape the digital path using a cross-sectoral approach and integrating all relevant policy areas such as research and innovation, industrial, education, economic, social and employment policies. |
| --- | --- |

2.12.

| 2.13. | However, it must be ensured that all citizens are included in the digital transition and efforts. In this regard, the proposal needs to take due account of the most vulnerable people with respect to exposure to the digital gap. Special attention should therefore be paid to the needs of older people and persons with disabilities, with regard to training, skilling and accessibility requirements for digital services. |
| --- | --- |

2.13.

| 2.14. | To ensure the inclusive adoption and implementation of the programme, and in shaping, implementing and monitoring the policy programme and related national roadmaps, the EESC considers it crucial to guarantee the involvement of civil society representatives, not just social partners, but also consumers’ organisations and other interested stakeholders. |
| --- | --- |

2.14.

3.   Specific comments

| 3.1. | The EESC welcomes the Commission’s vision and avenues for Europe’s digital transformation as this promotes coordinated action across the EU by setting a monitoring and cooperation mechanism for directing and enhancing policies, measures and action to reach the digital targets of the EU through cooperation between Member States. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

3.2.   General objectives

| 3.2.1. | The EESC deems the general objectives stated in the proposal to be relevant for enhancing digital development in an effective way, in line with the principles and aspects pointed out in the general comments above. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.1.

| 3.2.2. | The EESC highlights that the general objectives provide a qualitative framework for the quantitative digital targets and, as such, they need to be closely monitored together with the targets, to ensure that the targets are met in a way that fulfils economic, social and environmental objectives. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.2.

3.3.   Digital targets

| 3.3.1. | The EESC considers the four priority areas and their targets to be mutually supportive and emphasises that they need to be developed in their entirety. For example, adequate skills and proper infrastructure are enablers for the development of businesses and public services. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.1.

| 3.3.2. | The EESC calls for ambitious targets for increasing the number of people that have at least basic digital skills and believes that all people should have the opportunity to acquire basic digital skills, including cybersecurity skills. Persons with low-level qualifications and older people must not be left behind in this process. This should be facilitated by means of the EU and national funding, for example through the European Social Fund. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.2.

| 3.3.3. | In addition to the target for basic skills, the EESC highlights the need to increase vocational digital skills to respond to the skills gap and meet the demands of working life. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.3.

| 3.3.4. | From the point of view of strengthening digital excellence, the EESC supports a considerable increase in the number of highly-skilled digital professionals employed. The EESC also finds it crucial to enhance convergence between women and men, so as to unleash the whole potential of society in this respect. In addition to domestic professionals, it is useful to attract foreign talent through research cooperation projects. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.4.

| 3.3.5. | As proper infrastructure is a prerequisite for any digital development, the EESC fully endorses the target of all European households being covered by reliable and fast connections. This is equally important for all businesses. Moreover, businesses and consumers are ever-more interconnected through digital products and services. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.5.

| 3.3.6. | To strengthen the EU’s global position and reduce the dependency on foreign technology, the EESC endorses the target of enhancing the production of semiconductors in the EU, while stressing the need to enhance the production of other industrial components as well. The same holds true for the enhancement of quantum capabilities, including the rapid introduction of a quantum computer and the deployment of edge nodes. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.6.

| 3.3.7. | As businesses play a central role in the digital transformation, the EESC deems it essential to encourage the uptake of digital technologies in all enterprises. The EESC endorses the target of 70 % uptake, but believes that the technologies should neither be defined in detail nor exclusively, as this would risk preventing innovation. Although AI, cloud computing services and big data are relevant as strategic technologies today, new technologies will continue to develop tomorrow, and the EESC recommends that the aforementioned target be technology-neutral. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.7.

| 3.3.8. | While it is important to enhance the uptake of AI and other advanced technologies, it must also be recognised that SMEs have big challenges in adopting even basic digital technologies. Special attention needs to be paid to micro-enterprises, which are the biggest group of enterprises in number, but have the least resources. Moreover, the specificities of social economy enterprises also need to be taken into consideration. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.8.

| 3.3.9. | The EESC endorses the enhancement of innovative start-ups and scale-ups by improving their access to finance. Given the major share of other kinds of SMEs, it is also crucial to support them in the digital transformation. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.9.

| 3.3.10. | The targets for the digitalisation of public services are highly welcome from the point of view of both citizens and businesses. The EESC also notes that the digitalisation of businesses and public services is closely linked and that they serve each other. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.10.

3.4.   Monitoring and reporting

| 3.4.1. | The EESC welcomes the move to set out key performance indicators for each digital target, to enable the monitoring of progress in a comparable and transparent way. The EESC stresses the need to avoid overlapping data collection and to make use of existing sources and systems to the greatest extent. The Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) provides a relevant basis for the work. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.1.

| 3.4.2. | The EESC deems it important that the annual report on the state of the digital decade help follow the progress and identify problems at both EU and national levels. Moreover, the report should help Member States to benchmark their action and learn from each other. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.2.

3.5.   National roadmaps and their assessment

| 3.5.1. | National strategic roadmaps are at the heart of the policy programme and thus of major importance for digital development in the EU. It is therefore important to support Member States in this effort. While Member States obviously need guidance on how to assess and predict the impact of planned policies, measures and action, it is even more important to provide support for the measures and action themselves. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.1.

| 3.5.2. | The proposal for the policy programme is based on EU-level targets, which means that there are no absolute targets for individual Member States. It follows that the process of assessing national roadmaps and their success in achieving the EU-level targets is very demanding. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.2.

| 3.5.3. | The EESC deems Union-level projected trajectories to be a useful tool in outlining future developments in a rough way. However, one should avoid making over-simplified conclusions or recommendations based on them. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.3.

| 3.5.4. | While the yearly assessment and cooperation process between the Commission and the Member States is important, the EESC believes that exchanging good practice, carrying out peer reviews and creating multi-country projects between Member States are productive ways of encouraging progress. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.4.

| 3.5.5. | Given that there are several parallel processes that aim to implement EU-level targets in various policy fields, the EESC stresses the need to ensure policy coherence and avoid multiple and overlapping efforts. While keeping up the sense of urgency, it is also worth weighing up whether the process needs to be repeated on an annual basis, considering that many measures take a longer time to implement. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.5.

3.6.   Multi-Country Projects

| 3.6.1. | The EESC considers the multi-country projects as a valuable tool to strengthen the EU’s excellence and global position in selected areas. They may also help in finding solutions to challenges that require more resources than an individual Member State can offer. Moreover, multi-country projects are one way of disseminating good practice across borders. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.1.

| 3.6.2. | Rather than only contributing to the fulfilment of digital targets, multi-country projects should always aim to create true added value for participating countries and for the EU as a whole. The EESC considers that projects on innovation, infrastructure and skills development best meet this requirement. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.2.

| 3.6.3. | The EESC emphasises that this cooperation mechanism must not increase any division within the EU but, on the contrary, result in a stronger Union. To this end, it is important that all Member States be offered an opportunity to participate in a multi-country project, on the basis of their interests and their financial and non-financial contribution. The EESC calls on the Commission to accelerate and guide the projects in a way that ensures the best possible benefit from the point of view of the whole EU. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.3.

3.7.   European Digital Infrastructure Consortium (EDIC)

| 3.7.1. | The proposal introduces the possibility of establishing European Digital Infrastructure Consortium (EDIC) for the implementation of a multi-country project, to be adopted by the Commission upon an application from at least three Member States. The EESC welcomes the idea of the EDIC as a tool to combine EU and national funding and private financing for the purposes of the digital decade policy programme. |
| --- | --- |

3.7.1.

| 3.7.2. | Like the multi-country projects themselves, implementation of the EDIC must be inclusive, allowing any Member State to join the consortium as a member, on reasonable terms or as an observer. All in all, the statutes of the EDIC need to be clear and define the roles of the Member States, the Commission and other participants, such as international organisations or private entities. |
| --- | --- |

3.7.2.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  OJ C 374, 16.9.2021, p. 22.

1

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/92 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/92

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Council Directive restructuring the Union framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity

[COM(2021) 563 final — 2021/0213 (CNS)]

(2022/C 194/13)

| Rapporteur: | Stefan BACK |
| --- | --- |
| Co-rapporteur: | Philippe CHARRY |

Rapporteur:

Stefan BACK

Co-rapporteur:

Philippe CHARRY

| Referral | Council of the European Union, 21.9.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Articles 113 and 192 (2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion |
| Adopted in section | 14.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 20.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 192/6/15 |

Referral

Council of the European Union, 21.9.2021

Legal basis

Articles 113 and 192 (2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion

Adopted in section

14.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

20.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

192/6/15

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | The EESC welcomes the objective of the proposal, because it updates and seeks to clarify the framework of the 2003 Directive and because it seeks to structure taxation in a way that favours sustainable non-fossil energy. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | The EESC regrets that the taxation of biofuels under the proposal is too rigidly linked to the categorisation made in the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) and believes that the scarcity of alternative fuels and the ensuing high cost level call for a more flexible attitude on admissible biofuels, including with regard to the minimum taxation level, which should be much lower than that applicable to fossil fuels. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | The EESC considers that the increased minimum tax level may have negative social effects, causing energy and mobility poverty, and is pleased to note that Member States may go below minimum levels for heating fuel and electricity used by vulnerable households and organisations recognised as charitable and that a ten-year total exemption from taxation for heating fuel and electricity used by ‘vulnerable households’ is proposed. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | The EESC recommends using the notion of ‘energy precarity’, which is a qualitative phenomenon (perception of cold, humidity, comfort level) as well as a quantitative one (energy costs, poverty threshold), and cannot be treated solely in terms of its quantitative aspects, as the proposal for a Directive does with the notion of ‘vulnerable household’. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | The EESC highlights that environmental taxation must also clearly pursue social objectives, in the interest of its social acceptability; wherever the question arises of the redistribution of tax revenues, the Committee recommends that the proceeds of such taxes be returned, for example, to the people most heavily affected. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | The EESC emphasises that financial difficulties arising from energy costs are currently under the spotlight in many Member States. The EESC believes that significant contributions to resolving these problems can be made by substantially increasing investment in renewable energies and adjusting the European pricing system to ensure that it reflects the price of all forms of energy, including the cheapest ones. This requires changing the current system of auctions in the wholesale electricity market. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | The EESC also warns of the risk of negative effects on the competitiveness of European industry and notes that the Commission proposes enabling Member States to grant tax reductions the consumption of energy products used for heating in favour of energy-intensive business or where agreements are concluded with business entities or associations to improve energy efficiency. This possibility is essential to preserve competitiveness of EU industry given that most economies outside the EU have so far failed to adopt tangible climate measures. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

| 1.8. | The EESC also regrets that the Commission proposal has in principle removed the possibility to differentiate the minimum taxation rates between business and consumers. |
| --- | --- |

1.8.

| 1.9. | The EESC finds the reduction possibilities granted for the transport of goods and passengers inadequate, since they exclude road transport and do not respect the principle of technical neutrality. The EESC would have preferred a general exemption or reduction for goods transport and for enterprises with significant export business to third countries. |
| --- | --- |

1.9.

| 1.10. | The EESC highlights in this context the Commission’s proposal to harmonise tax levels between diesel and petrol. This means a cost increase for goods transport, which could be compensated for through a general reduction in taxes on fuels used in goods transport. The same reasoning applies to the disappearance of the distinction between commercial and non-commercial diesel. |
| --- | --- |

1.10.

| 1.11. | The EESC also points out that the dedicated tax reduction possibilities provided for in Articles 8(2) and 18 regarding certain types of equipment and energy-intensive industries are extremely selective and could, given their discretionary nature, cause the same kind of tax competition that the Commission proposal seeks to eliminate. |
| --- | --- |

1.11.

| 1.12. | Regarding the added value of extending taxation to aviation and waterborne transport inside the EU, the EESC underlines the importance of equally concentrating other productive ways to promote improved sustainability in these modes. With respect for instance to aviation, new and sustainable means of propulsion are being developed, and dedicated means to promote those should be focused on. |
| --- | --- |

1.12.

| 1.13. | The EESC considers that the provisions on maritime transport and aviation do not take sufficient account of the situation of island countries, countries with extensive archipelagos and countries with long distances and sparsely populated regions. |
| --- | --- |

1.13.

| 1.14. | The EESC also notes that it has been left to Member States to decide whether they want to make extra-EU air navigation and waterborne navigation subject to the same levels of taxation as apply inside the EU or to make them exempt from such operations. The EESC is highly critical of this provision, as it may encourage Member States to go it alone regarding the taxation of these modes; instead, it is primarily worldwide solutions that should be promoted, as unilateral action may cause serious complications. |
| --- | --- |

1.14.

2.   Background to the opinion, including the legislative proposal concerned

| 2.1. | As part of the ‘Fit for 55’ package, the Commission has submitted a proposal for a Council Directive restructuring the Union framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity (recast), recasting the current Council Directive 2003/96/EC (1) on the same subject. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | As a reason for making the proposal, the Commission has invoked the need to introduce clear taxation rules for energy products and electricity to make sure they continue to contribute to the smooth functioning of the internal market, while at the same time tackling the climate- and environment-related challenges that are offered by the Green Deal. Energy taxation can contribute to the ambition set out in the European Climate Law, which states that CO2 emissions should be reduced by at least 55 % by 2030 as compared to 1990 by ensuring that the taxation of motor fuels, heating fuels and electricity better reflects their impact on the environment and health. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | Therefore, new higher minimum levels of taxation are proposed and the possibilities for Member States to grant exemptions reduced and more circumscribed. Furthermore, aviation and maritime fuels are made subject to taxation with respect primarily to most intra-EU operations, with an option for the Member States to exempt or apply the same level of taxation to extra-EU air or waterborne navigation. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | The proposal is part of the ‘Fit for 55’ package. As it is an expression of the ‘polluter pays’ principle, there is a strong link to the ETS system and the proposal to update that system, also part of the package. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

3.   General comments

| 3.1. | The EESC welcomes the objective of the proposal, both because it updates and seeks to clarify the framework of the 2003 Directive and because it seeks to structure taxation on energy products and electricity used as heating or motor fuels in a way that favours sustainable non-fossil energy. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

| 3.2. | The EESC notes that, whereas there is no formal CO2 emission element in the tax levels proposed, the proposed taxation structure would nevertheless have a similar effect, given that the highest minimum taxation levels are set for CO2-emitting fossil fuels. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.

| 3.3. | The EESC in this context regrets that the taxation of biofuels under the Proposal is too rigidly linked to the categorisation made in the Renewable Energy Directive (RED). The EESC believes that the scarcity of alternative fuels and the ensuing high-cost level call for a more flexible attitude on admissible biofuels, both with respect to RED II, which is not the subject of this opinion, and with regard to the minimum taxation level, which should be much lower than that applicable to fossil fuels. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.

| 3.4. | The EESC takes the view that the increased minimum tax level may have negative social effects, causing energy and mobility poverty. Clearly, this issue was considered by the Commission when authorising the Member States to go below minimum levels for heating fuel and electricity used by households and organisations recognised as charitable and when authorising a ten-year total exemption from taxation for heating fuel and electricity used by ‘vulnerable households’, as defined in Article 17 c). The EESC regrets that similar measures are not included to avoid mobility poverty. The possibilities for reduction proposed for public transport and for modes other than road transport are not helpful in this context. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.

| 3.5. | The social reality of green taxation is twofold: on the one hand, it does not affect all households in the same way, and it is often the most vulnerable and the middle-class households that have the highest energy costs proportionate to their income. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.

| 3.6. | The EESC underscores that, even though the Commission takes the view that the social aspect of its proposal is taken into account in the social part of the legislative package — that is, the proposal for a Regulation establishing the ‘Social Climate Fund’ — no dedicated impact analysis has been carried out with respect to this proposal for a Regulation (see the text of the proposal for a Regulation). Instead, the proposal is based on the impact assessment underpinning the 2030 Climate Target Plan and that supporting the revision of the ETS Directive. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.

| 3.6.1. | The structure of the fund also brings up some questions. Only part of the fund will be earmarked for social compensation; the rest will be devoted to promotional measures in favour of electric vehicles as well as to investment in recharging infrastructure and decarbonisation of buildings. The EESC doubts whether low-income households will benefit from such measures, bearing in mind that support measures for electric vehicles will rather be for the benefit of more well-off households. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.1.

| 3.6.2. | In the opinion of the EESC, designing a just and efficient compensation mechanism that takes various inequalities into account is a complex objective to which the ‘Social Climate Fund’ does not really respond; a relatively poor country with insignificant inequalities could receive less money from the fund than a rich country with considerable inequalities. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.2.

| 3.7. | The EESC holds that the impact analysis of the proposal for a Directive is not sufficiently developed. It underscores that, in fact, environmental taxation carries a double social cost: it does not impact all households in the same manner, and it is often the most precarious households and those in the middle classes that have the highest energy costs relative to their income. |
| --- | --- |

3.7.

| 3.8. | The EESC holds that the proposal for a Directive should establish a clearer notion of the term ‘precarity’; indeed, Article 17 of the proposal provides that, ‘vulnerable households’ shall mean households significantly affected by the impacts of this Directive which, for the purpose of this Directive, means that they are below the ‘at risk of poverty’ threshold, defined as 60 % of the national median equivalised disposable income”. |
| --- | --- |

3.8.

| 3.9. | Since 2009, with the Directive concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity, the concepts of energy precarity and poverty have been in use: the ‘energy poor’ are customers/households with limited access to energy (mainly gas and electricity). The term ‘energy precarity’ refers to individuals or households whose resources and housing conditions do not allow them to access adequate energy supplies to provide a minimum level of comfort. |
| --- | --- |

3.9.

| 3.9.1. | The EESC wonders why the recast of the Energy Taxation Directive introduces the criterion of ‘60 % of the national median equivalised disposable income’, even though the concept of fuel poverty is more suited to this purpose and is also multidimensional, encompassing:






  — | household economic poverty (income, non-energy costs); |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.9.1.

—

household economic poverty (income, non-energy costs);

| — | the risks associated with energy supply (high and volatile prices, the quality of energy plants); |
| --- | --- |

—

the risks associated with energy supply (high and volatile prices, the quality of energy plants);

| — | the state of disrepair of buildings, or their geographical isolation, the lack of public transport, etc., often linked to transport-related obligations (fixed distance between home and work). |
| --- | --- |

—

the state of disrepair of buildings, or their geographical isolation, the lack of public transport, etc., often linked to transport-related obligations (fixed distance between home and work).

| 3.9.2. | Each one of these weaknesses will create energy precarity. |
| --- | --- |

3.9.2.

| 3.9.3. | The EESC recommends using the notion of ‘energy precarity’, which is a qualitative notion (perception of cold, humidity, comfort level) as well as a quantitative one (energy costs, poverty threshold), and cannot be understood solely in quantitative terms as the proposal for a Directive does regarding the notion of ‘vulnerable households’. |
| --- | --- |

3.9.3.

| 3.9.4. | The EESC stresses that social schemes to support people with low incomes must not be based on the principle of strict thresholds as these lead to unjustified differences in the treatment of people whose income may only be a few euro cents above or below the set thresholds. Therefore, any rigid threshold, such as the threshold of 60 % provided for in the proposal for a Directive, may not achieve the objective pursued and, furthermore, may trigger a lot of negative behaviour among members of the public and may lead to a shift from employment to the shadow economy or to the concealment of income. |
| --- | --- |

3.9.4.

| 3.9.5. | The EESC also points out that social support for people with low incomes varies considerably from one Member State to another and that a lot of it is not taxable and is therefore not regarded as income by the tax authorities. |
| --- | --- |

3.9.5.

| 3.10. | On top of precarities linked to housing (6,9 % of households in the EU-27 are not able to heat their homes adequately, ranging from 30,1 % in Bulgaria to 1,8 % in Finland, which demonstrates the extent to which energy precarity varies), there is also precarity linked to mobility and transport. Petrol prices influence the mobility behaviour of households, in particular those that live in areas without public transport and those whose cars are old and who cannot change them. This then leads to new forms of energy precarity linked to mobility and transport. |
| --- | --- |

3.10.

| 3.11. | The EESC emphasises in this regard that financial difficulties arising from energy costs are currently under the spotlight in many Member States, with negative effects both for the most vulnerable families and for business. The EESC believes that significant contributions to resolving these problems can be made by substantially increasing investment in renewable energies and by reforming the European price formation system to ensure that it reflects the price of all forms of energy, including the cheapest ones. This requires a change in the auctioning system for wholesale electricity markets under European internal electricity market rules. |
| --- | --- |

3.11.

| 3.12. | The EESC also warns of the risk of negative effects on the competitiveness of European industry and notes that the Commission proposes enabling Member States to grant tax reductions on consumption for energy products used for heating in favour of energy-intensive business or where agreements are concluded with business entities or associations to improve energy efficiency. This possibility is essential to preserve competitiveness of EU industry given that most economies outside EU have so far failed to adopt tangible climate measures. |
| --- | --- |

3.12.

| 3.13. | The EESC also regrets that the Commission proposal has in principle removed the possibility to differentiate the minimum taxation rates between business and consumers. |
| --- | --- |

3.13.

| 3.14. | The EESC takes note of the possibility to reduce taxes for certain modes but regrets that no opening is offered with respect to road transport, except for transport in trolley buses. |
| --- | --- |

3.14.

| 3.15. | In general, the EESC finds the reduction possibilities granted for the transport of goods and passengers inadequate, since they exclude road transport and do not respect the principle of technical neutrality, for instance by designing trolley buses as the only road vehicle that can be subject to tax reduction. |
| --- | --- |

3.15.

| 3.15.1. | The EESC would have preferred a general exemption or reduction for goods transport and for enterprises with significant export business to third countries. |
| --- | --- |

3.15.1.

| 3.15.2. | The EESC highlights in this context that the Commission proposal aims to harmonise taxation levels of diesel and petrol. This means a cost increase for goods transport, which could be compensated for through a general reduction in taxes on fuels used in goods transport. The same reasoning applies to the disappearance of the distinction between commercial and non-commercial diesel. |
| --- | --- |

3.15.2.

| 3.16. | The EESC also points out that the dedicated tax reduction possibilities provided for in Articles 8(2) and 18 regarding certain types of equipment and energy-intensive industries are extremely selective and could, given their discretionary nature, cause the same kind of tax competition that the Commission proposal seeks to eliminate. It is difficult to understand why a simple straightforward solution was not preferred, in the form of reduced tax levels for business actors. This is particularly relevant with respect to ‘mineralogical processes’ which, as such, can be covered by the reduction options under Article 18, but at the discretion of the Member State concerned, which causes legal uncertainty and tax competition. |
| --- | --- |

3.16.

| 3.17. | Regarding the added value of extending taxation to aviation and waterborne transport inside the EU, the EESC underlines the importance of equally concentrating other productive ways to promote improved sustainability in these modes. With respect to aviation, new and sustainable means of propulsion are being developed, and dedicated means to promote those should be focused on. With respect to waterborne transport, this is one of the sectors where decarbonisation appears to be extremely difficult. Hence there is a risk that making such transport subject to taxation will only lead to higher costs, as is also likely to be the case with the extension of ETS to that field. In both contexts, the ten-year transition period for overall phasing-in of taxation with respect to aviation and of dedicated tax regimes for sustainable biofuels and other alternative fuels appears extremely short. |
| --- | --- |

3.17.

| 3.18. | The EESC considers that the provisions on maritime transport and aviation do not take sufficient account of the situation of island countries, countries with extensive archipelagos and countries with long distances and sparsely populated regions. |
| --- | --- |

3.18.

| 3.19. | The EESC also notes that it has been left to Member States to decide whether they want to make extra EU air navigation and waterborne navigation subject to the same levels of taxation as apply inside the EU or to make them exempt from such operations. The EESC is highly critical of this provision, as it may encourage Member States to go it alone regarding the taxation of modes whereas it is primarily worldwide solutions that should be promoted and whereas unilateral action may cause serious complications. |
| --- | --- |

3.19.

| 3.20. | Lastly, the EESC wonders how effective green taxation will be. Green taxation instruments concern the energy, transport, pollution and natural resource sectors. Although many of them have been developed within the European framework and are therefore common to all EU countries, their application differs from country to country, even though it is supposed to be regulated. |
| --- | --- |

3.20.

| 3.21. | The different forms of redistributing tax revenues can work against taxpayers’ acceptance of green taxation: the reduction of the public deficit, the redistribution of revenues to businesses or households, the reduction of other taxes such as those on labour income or the redistribution of revenues to environmental policies or investments. As demonstrated by the ‘yellow vests’ crisis in France, these four forms of redistributing revenues are not enough to ensure acceptance of price increases on taxed products. |
| --- | --- |

3.21.

| 3.22. | In summary, the EESC takes the view that the social acceptability of environmental taxation cannot neglect compensation to take account of the revenues of households and their energy precarity, in its structural dimension (absence of public transport, insulation of housing, efficiency of the heating system, type of vehicle owned). |
| --- | --- |

3.22.

| 3.23. | Environmental taxation is often considered unjust since it hits modest households hardest, and now increasingly the middle classes as well. Low-income households that spend a larger share of their income on petrol and transport will be hit disproportionately hard. They are also less able to carry out an ecological transition: while the operating costs of low-carbon products (electric vehicles, solar cells etc.) may be lower, a high initial investment is required, which is an obstacle for households with limited access to capital. Furthermore, households in a precarious situation are obliged to plan their spending from a short-term perspective, which does not allow them to benefit from possible long-term savings. |
| --- | --- |

3.23.

| 3.24. | To be socially acceptable, environmental taxation must be complemented by corrective measures, but no such measures appear either in the proposal for a Directive or in the Social Climate Fund. |
| --- | --- |

3.24.

Brussels, 20 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity (OJ L 283, 31.10.2003, p. 51).

1

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/97 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/97

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Recommendation for a Council recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area

(COM(2021) 742 final)

(2022/C 194/14)

| Rapporteur: | Juraj SIPKO |
| --- | --- |

Rapporteur:

Juraj SIPKO

| Referral | European Commission, 7.1.2022 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion |
| Adopted in section | 14.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 229/2/10 |

Referral

European Commission, 7.1.2022

Legal basis

Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion

Adopted in section

14.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

19.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

229/2/10

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | Current socioeconomic development in countries of the euro area is accompanied by a high level of uncertainty associated with the uncontrolled and rapid spread of COVID-19. Therefore, the EESC welcomes the most recent Commission document on economic developments in the EU Member States and the analysis of consequences for the management process (1). Simultaneously, it refers to the historic opportunity to accept and consistently implement without delay corresponding practical and effective policies on the road to the complex, though, in view of current developments, necessary transformation of the whole of society. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | One of the greatest challenges in the area of internal macroeconomic imbalances is how to ensure gradual consolidation of public finances. The EESC is of the opinion that the current legislative framework in the form of the existing Stability and Growth Pact is no longer appropriate to the current conditions. Therefore, it emphasises that a reasonable and acceptable revision of fiscal rules (2) of the legislative framework focused on its simplification and monitoring is a clear requirement. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | The EESC refers to the COVID-19 pandemic that struck as most countries were undergoing a process of correction of macroeconomic imbalances. The pandemic interrupted the reduction in debt-to-GDP ratios, while housing prices accelerated, suggesting an overall aggravation of macroeconomic conditions. In addition, the EESC refers to the largest external imbalances which are manifested in the Eurosystem — TARGET2 (3). These imbalances have been creating the largest differences between countries since their development. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | The EESC is monitoring the rapid increase in inflation since the start of 2021. This increase, following years of low inflation, is mainly linked to the strong rebound in energy prices from historic lows during the pandemic, disruption of supply chains and increased transport costs. It is of the opinion that the current high inflation rate is the result of factors that relate to the pandemic and the reopening of economies, which are temporary in nature. Price growth can be expected to moderate in 2022 and 2023, with inflation levels declining to past average. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | Completion of the process of financial union is a prerequisite for a well-functioning European Monetary Union. Despite the progress made in building the banking union, the EESC emphasises that the adoption and prompt approval of further action is needed. The fragmentation of capital markets in the Member States does not create sufficient scope for easier access for businesses to financial resources in the single capital market within the framework of the Capital Markets Union. Therefore, further progress in the completion of the Capital Markets Union is needed. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | The EESC is closely following the deepening process of divergence between Member States, but also within the EU and euro area countries. It therefore supports the adoption of a combination of economic policies that make effective use of available domestic resources, both public and private, including the financial resources created within the framework of the NextGenerationEU and the Recovery and Resilience Facility. The effective and prudent implementation of these financial resources may lead to suspension and later to resumption of the convergence process. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | The EESC is concerned about progressively deepening social instability. Since sufficient measures to combat the growth of inequality and poverty were not adopted and implemented following the global financial crisis, COVID-19 only further exacerbated these inequalities and the growth of poverty. Therefore, there is now an urgent need to develop and monitor appropriate indicators of inequality and poverty, even in the context of sustainable development goals. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

| 1.8. | The greatest existential threat for further life on the planet is the unprecedented negative climatic changes. The EESC calls for urgent measures to be taken and implemented to fight climate change, including the development of basic indicators to measure the socioeconomic consequences of the crisis. Moreover, the EESC stresses that the negative impacts of the climate crisis will have a big impact on macroeconomic stability (growth in expenditure, price rises due to drought), but also on financial stability, particularly the insurance business (4), and social stability. |
| --- | --- |

1.8.

| 1.9. | The evolutionary technological process is leading to the rapid introduction of digitisation and financial innovations. The EESC welcomes the ECB and Commission’s decision to open discussions on the introduction of the digital euro. The introduction of the digital euro can bring potential benefits to euro area citizens and businesses, considering all the advantages. |
| --- | --- |

1.9.

| 1.10. | Partly thanks to all the measures taken and implemented following the global financial crisis, the banking sector in the euro area countries appears to be relatively stable at least for now. The EESC points out potential insolvency problems, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises. Adverse developments in the insolvency of small and medium-sized enterprises could be disruptive to stability in the financial sector, mainly the banking industry. In line with this, the EESC calls for more consideration to be given to introducing the necessary measures to safeguard the stability of the financial system. |
| --- | --- |

1.10.

| 1.11. | The EESC draws attention to a prudent approach in combating the still unresolved and ongoing COVID-19 crisis, but above all stresses the need to prepare for potential other viral crises. Policies aimed at building a strong immune system among the population can create the conditions for reducing healthcare expenditure caused by the spread of disease and, simultaneously, create better conditions for the health of all workers involved in creating value in society. |
| --- | --- |

1.11.

2.   Background

| 2.1. | In comparison with the last EESC opinion on economic policy in the euro area, current developments are characterised by high inflation, which is mainly driven by energy commodity prices, notably oil and natural gas. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | Wholesale prices of natural gas and electricity have increased by an average of 429 % and 230 %, respectively, since 2019 (5). The growth in retail prices is not significant as yet — it represents 14 % (or 7 %). Recently published short-term forecasts suggest that wholesale prices may continue to rise until the last quarter of 2022. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | Inflation has increased strongly since the beginning of the year, following years of low inflation, and repeatedly exceeding forecasts. In November it reached 4,9 % (6). The main factor behind this rapid price growth is the surge in commodity prices — in particular oil and gas — from their historic lows back to, or above, pre-pandemic levels. In addition, disruptions to production and logistics persist in many parts of the world, which are pushing up prices of goods, in particular, in times of a surge in aggregate demand. Inflation is expected to decline as of early 2022. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | Despite encouraging expectations for a recovery in the real economy in the first half of 2021, it now seems that the recovery process is more complicated due to the rapid spread of the third wave of the epidemic. The battle against COVID-19 is far from over and its impact on the real economy might last for several more years. The persistent problems associated with energy input prices and the unavailability of some types of commodities required in the production cycle represent major constraints both in the use of production capacities and in the investments and consumption under consideration. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

| 2.5. | The use of financial instruments in the framework of the NextGenerationEU could have a positive impact on the performance of the real economy and overcoming problems associated with COVID-19. In this context, the ongoing allocation of funds by means of the REACT-EU instrument, as well as the Recovery and Resilience Facility focused on the recovery, resilience and sustainability of individual economies, are perceived as very timely. |
| --- | --- |

2.5.

| 2.6. | Historically, the biggest drop in economic growth since the start of European integration was recorded in 2020. This year, real economic growth in the EU Member States is expected to reach approx. 5 %, while in 2022 real economic growth of 4,3 % is expected. In 2023, real economic growth of 2,5 % in euro area Member States can be expected. The main driver of economic growth in 2021 was household consumption, which reached 3,5 % in the euro area in the second quarter. |
| --- | --- |

2.6.

| 2.7. | It is necessary to point out the existing risks when assessing the development of economic growth. These are linked to a decline in trade in goods, but also, on the demand side, to the consequences of the impact on the production process and the increase in costs in the euro area manufacturing industry. In addition, the disruption of global value chains and the relatively high dependence of manufacturing industries on imports of raw materials and microprocessors in the euro area are other factors. |
| --- | --- |

2.7.

| 2.8. | COVID-19 has taken a heavy toll on public finances. After the epidemic, euro area Member States will face major challenges in consolidating public finances. In 2020, a deficit of 7,2 % GDP was recorded, while no country achieved a fiscal surplus. The deficit is expected to decline slightly to 7,1 % GDP in 2021. A more significant fall can be expected in 2022, and continue in 2023, with the deficit projected to decrease to around 2,5 %, which is a substantially higher deficit than that recorded before the COVID-19 outbreak (0,6 % of GDP in 2019). |
| --- | --- |

2.8.

| 2.9. | Labour market developments continue to be accompanied by structural problems in individual euro area countries. Despite this, the unemployment rate is relatively low, due mainly to the wide implementation of job retention schemes. The current labour market in most euro area economies faces a relative shortage of skilled labour. Despite the lower than expected unemployment rate due to COVID-19, there are a whole range of unresolved problems in the labour market related to necessary requalification, especially in the context of the transformation process under way. |
| --- | --- |

2.9.

| 2.10. | The EU and euro area as a whole have registered a current-account surplus, but with readings varying markedly across countries. Some countries continue to record large current-account surpluses. On the other hand, countries with important cross-border tourism sectors have generally seen a marked increase in current-account deficits or a reduction in their modest surpluses. This is expected to correct gradually with the recovery in travel. When assessing the level of external imbalances within euro area Member States, it is necessary to consider the unprecedented increase in imbalances in the TARGET2 payment system, which, this year, has reached the highest level since its inception (7). |
| --- | --- |

2.10.

| 2.11. | At present, due to the rapid and uncontrollable spread of the virus, additional corrections to the presented relatively promising development in economic growth can be expected. The current process of introducing restrictive measures as a result of the epidemic could significantly negatively impact real economic growth and the already unsustainable level of public debt in some Member States, including deepening inequality and rising poverty. |
| --- | --- |

2.11.

3.   General comments

| 3.1. | The EESC is following the current economic and social developments associated with the high degree of uncertainty with concern. This degree of uncertainty is associated with two negative factors: the unprecedented accumulation of public debt and the rise in inflation. The growth in consumer prices is leading to a deterioration of the social situation of households and negatively affecting living standards. As debt ratios were already high in some euro area Member States before the crisis, the rapid deterioration of the fiscal position means it will be key for those euro area Member States to adopt and implement fiscal consolidation measures in the medium term, once economic conditions allow. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

| 3.2. | The EESC welcomes the gradual recovery of the real economy. In this context, it supports the intentions to increase both public and private investment. It also recognises that, in the context of creating a comprehensive NextGenerationEU framework, there is scope to use these resources effectively to support real qualitative economic growth. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.

| 3.3. | The EESC believes that the sharp rise in inflation will not lead to a restrictive ECB monetary policy, as the drivers of inflation appear to be temporary and originate mainly on the supply side. Therefore, the EESC supports the focus of economic policy on strengthening the resilience, flexibility, autonomy and functionality of strategic structures to be able to face repeated symmetric shocks in the future. |
| --- | --- |

3.3.

| 3.4. | The EESC supports fundamental historic systemic changes accompanying the transformation to a green, digital and socially just economy. Despite the complexity and unpredictability of further developments regarding COVID-19, the EESC supports the European Green Deal (8) and considers it a historic opportunity for sustainable economic and social development on the old continent. In this context, the EESC supports the acceptance and consideration of all important factors focused on preserving life on the planet for the present and future generations. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.

| 3.5. | The EESC calls for the urgent adoption and implementation of measures aimed at the progressive reduction of inequalities and poverty in the eurozone member countries (9). In this context, it sees potential for the use of all practical revenue and expenditure instruments, including reducing counter-productive expenditure, fighting corruption, the black economy and non-transparent operations, including a long-delayed solution to the tax haven issue. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.

| 3.6. | In view of the complexity and unpredictability of current developments, the EESC agrees that individual Member States should adopt fiscal policies taking into account the state of the recovery, fiscal sustainability and the need to reduce economic, social and territorial divergences. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.

| 3.7. | The EESC is aware that fiscal policy should be sufficiently active and flexible to face potential waves of virus spread and mutation. In this context, it supports additional and necessary expenditure on healthcare until an overall gradual return to normal. |
| --- | --- |

3.7.

| 3.8. | In addressing the current complex economic and social developments, the EESC recommends implementing a consistent mix of macroeconomic policy. In view of the overall recovery strategy, expansionary monetary policy combined with consistent expansionary fiscal policy can play a fundamental role. The adoption and implementation of the mix of macroeconomic policy should also be coordinated with social partners. |
| --- | --- |

3.8.

| 3.9. | The evolutionary technological process is linked to innovations in the financial sector. The EESC welcomes the first steps by the ECB and Commission in the creation of the digital euro (10). So far no decision on the introduction of a digital euro and its potential design features have been taken. With the process of introducing the digital euro, it could be possible to experience faster, more effective, lower-cost payment and clearance operations for both households and businesses, but implications for, e.g. clearance operations, should be taken into consideration. In this context, a contribution to the strategy of strengthening the international status of the euro could also be expected. |
| --- | --- |

3.9.

| 3.10. | The EESC supports and welcomes the start of public consultations aimed at management (governance) of public finances. In this context, the orientation is towards: (a) the timing of the fiscal consolidation process; (b) the definition of rules for long-term measures linked to overcoming the consequences of the epidemic, but in particular the investments associated with the green and digital economy; (c) and simplification of fiscal rules. The EESC points to its various opinions on economic governance and on fiscal rules in particular. In our latest opinion (11), in these regards, the EESC calls for the introduction of a golden rule for public investments in combination with an expenditure rule and points out that both national parliaments and the European Parliament need to be given a prominent role in the future EU economic governance framework. Moreover, the EESC calls for a greater involvement of civil society in the European Semester at both national and EU level and also for guidelines for a transition period, during which time the excessive deficit procedure should not be triggered. |
| --- | --- |

3.10.

4.   Specific comments

| 4.1. | The EESC welcomes the European Commission’s approach to the current adverse energy price developments, including the proposed short-term and medium-term measures. In view of the unpredictability of energy prices, the EESC calls for substantive and systemic measures to be taken to mitigate systemic unforeseen shocks from the external environment, thus creating the conditions for a sustainable, stable, resilient and socially just life for all euro area residents. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.

| 4.2. | The EESC greatly appreciates the initiation of public debate on the future setting of fiscal rules presented by the European Commission. This long-awaited initiative could lead to the creation of simple and easy-to-monitor rules that will correspond to the current situation at the start of the third decade of this century. In addition, the EESC points out that the process of gradual completion of fiscal union is also linked to the creation of the whole structure of the public finance management system, including the creation of the position of ‘Minister of Finance’. |
| --- | --- |

4.2.

| 4.3. | The EESC is following developments in the area of climate change with great concern. In this context, the EESC welcomes the adoption of the Fit for 55 package, including the EU Climate Target Plan. The Committee considers it crucial to adopt and implement measures to set generally adopted and accepted standards in the fight against climate crisis. As options are becoming limited and time is running out in the fight against climate change, the EESC urges the adoption of all urgent measures to combat climate change. Moreover, in the context of climate change, it will be necessary to analyse the impact on macroeconomic developments and their consequences, i.e. monetary and fiscal policy, including financial and social stability. |
| --- | --- |

4.3.

| 4.4. | The EESC stresses the need to complete financial union. Despite the gradual creation of the banking union’s architecture (12), every effort must be made to complete it (13). In addition, the EESC points to the need for effective functioning of the capital market within the EU states. In this context, efforts should be directed towards the further deepening of the Capital Markets Union (14) (15). |
| --- | --- |

4.4.

| 4.5. | The EESC supports the continuation of policies aimed at reducing aggressive tax planning, combating tax avoidance, and effective and fair taxation, which can lead to a reduction in inequalities in individual countries and poverty. |
| --- | --- |

4.5.

| 4.6. | On the journey towards a successful historic transformation, the EESC considers it of the utmost importance to systematically monitor and regularly evaluate the effectiveness of all measures adopted and implemented under individual national economic policies, and thus create favourable conditions for flexible responses to both changing internal shocks and unforeseen systemic shocks from the external environment. |
| --- | --- |

4.6.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_5321

1

(2)  https://www.ft.com/content/f3377da4-2ec6-4edb-b9b8-6a5af22bc2a2

2

(3)  https://www.ecb.europa.eu/stats/policy_and_exchange_rates/target_balances/html/index.en.html

3

(4)  https://www.imf.org/en/News/Seminars/Conferences/2021/11/17/9th-statistical-forum-measuring-climate-change

4

(5)  COM(2021) 660 final.

5

(6)  https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/11563351/2-29102021-AP-EN.pdf

6

(7)  https://sdw.ecb.europa.eu/reports.do?node=1000004859

7

(8)  https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_en

8

(9)  https://voxeu.org/article/income-inequality-eu-trends-and-policy-implications

9

(10)  https://www.ecb.europa.eu/paym/digital_euro/html/index.en.html

10

(11)  EESC opinion on Reshaping the EU fiscal framework for a sustainable recovery and a just transition (own-initiative opinion) (OJ C 105, 4.3.2022, p. 11).

11

(12)  https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2021/html/ecb.sp210318_1~e2126b2dec.en.html

12

(13)  OJ C 132, 24.3.2022, p. 151.

13

(14)  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_6251

14

(15)  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_21_6307

15

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/102 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/102

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — NAIADES III: Boosting future-proof European inland waterway transport

[COM(2021) 324 final]

(2022/C 194/15)

| Rapporteur: | Mateusz SZYMAŃSKI |
| --- | --- |

Rapporteur:

Mateusz SZYMAŃSKI

| Referral | European Commission, 10.8.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society |
| Adopted in section | 17.12.2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.01.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote | |
| (for/against/abstentions) | 242/1/5 |

Referral

European Commission, 10.8.2021

Legal basis

Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society

Adopted in section

17.12.2021

Adopted at plenary

19.01.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

242/1/5

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1. | The Committee believes that inland waterway transport (IWT) still has untapped potential. The Communication takes into account the significant problems of developing this mode of transport and, in principle, the EESC supports the proposed goals and objectives therein. |
| --- | --- |

1.1.

| 1.2. | In view of the changes in demand for transport and the upwards trend in seaport turnover, it is necessary to continuously adapt European transport to current and future needs. The EESC calls for this to be done on the basis of the principle of multimodality and smart shipping, which implies making the best possible use of the advantages of the various modes of transport to achieve the best possible results, while at the same time increasing safety and reducing the environmental burden. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.

| 1.3. | Regarding the Communication, putting the proposed changes in order of priority is recommended. The EESC believes that it will be easier to achieve the objectives if the two main priorities are set: (1) long-term — development and maintenance of waterway infrastructure, and (2) short-term — development of IWT in cities. |
| --- | --- |

1.3.

| 1.4. | In the EESC’s view, the planned changes will not be effective unless there is appropriate infrastructure underpinning the development and maintenance of this mode of transport. Without the prospect of improving navigation conditions on waterways, shipowners will not take the risk and not invest in a modern fleet, and the local authorities of individual countries will not be interested in creating intermodal terminals. |
| --- | --- |

1.4.

| 1.5. | Implementing the short-term priority on the development of IWT in cities requires specific conditions. The most important are: creating infrastructure for the ‘last mile’ by IWT and passenger transport, extending to passenger transport in IWT the preferential treatment given to other urban or regional transport modes, giving preferential treatment to zero-emission IWT in cities, and digitalisation. At the same time, it is important that the development of IWT in cities contributes to an improved quality of life. |
| --- | --- |

1.5.

| 1.6. | It is important to ensure adequate financial support mechanisms. Funding for infrastructure and innovative technologies should be ensured under current and future EU programmes. Such instruments are crucial given the specificities of the industry, including the dominance of SMEs. This is all the more important given that pro-environmental policies create significant challenges and can have an impact on the sector. |
| --- | --- |

1.6.

| 1.7. | Significant emphasis should be placed on issues related to the situation of crews. New technologies require new skills. Investments in skills and qualifications are needed. The lack of action poses threats relating to the safety of workers, crews and passengers. The EESC therefore underlines the need for Member States to properly implement Directive (EU) 2017/2397 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) on the recognition of professional qualifications in inland navigation. Furthermore, employment conditions including working time rules, adequate social protection legislation for the posting of workers and occupational health and safety in the sector need to be improved. |
| --- | --- |

1.7.

| 1.8. | The problem of low wages in the sector, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe, remains relevant, which makes IWT an unattractive employment prospect. We can see that crews are ageing, as young people are not interested in working in the sector. At the same time, the sector is not of interest to women. This leads to understaffing and limits the prospects for development. Multi-level social dialogue and collective bargaining in this sector that are properly carried out and supported by public authorities, should be key in developing solutions in this area. |
| --- | --- |

1.8.

| 1.9. | The EESC also points out that many announced and planned actions have so far not been implemented. It is therefore essential that the European, national and local authorities be fully involved and determined to achieve these objectives, having regard to the respective competences of the EU, the Member States and local authorities. This also applies to funding sources, which should take into account both European and national funding. Unfortunately, the EESC is disappointed to note that investment in IWT features only to a limited extent in the national recovery plans submitted by Member States. |
| --- | --- |

1.9.

2.   Context

| 2.1. | In its Communication the European Commission underlines the importance of IWT in building low-carbon and modern transport in the European Union. It points out that building more environmentally friendly transport is part of the European Green Deal, indicating the aims linked to this: inland waterway transport and short-sea shipping should increase by 25 % by 2030 and by 50 % by 2050 (2). |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

| 2.2. | The Communication notes that unsatisfactory progress has been made in increasing the share of IWT in the EU within the modal transport structure. At the same time, it highlights the untapped potential both along the TEN-T corridors and in cities. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

| 2.3. | In view of the above, additional measures have been proposed to make this transport sector more attractive. According to the Commission, there should be two key objectives: shifting more freight transport to IWT, and setting the sector on an irreversible path to zero-emissions, underpinned by a paradigm shift towards further digitalisation, as well as accompanying measures to support the current and future workforce. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

| 2.4. | These objectives are to be achieved through eight flagship initiatives planned for the 2021-2027 period. The outlined plan includes initiatives on infrastructure (flagship initiatives 1 and 4), multimodal transport (2 and 5), zero-emission vessels (6, 3, 8) and crews (flagship initiative 7). In this regard, the EESC’s believes that all flagship initiatives are important, but consideration should be given to setting priorities which are a precondition for achieving the set objectives. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

3.   General comments

| 3.1. | The EESC would like to underline that, as in its previous opinions, it supports initiatives aimed at strengthening IWT, considering it to be one of the most sustainable forms of transport with still unexploited potential. Unfortunately, the data shows that IWT, like other modes of transport, has suffered as a result of the COVID-19 crisis (3). |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

| 3.2. | In view of the changes in demand for transport and the upwards trend in seaport turnover, it is necessary to continuously adapt European transport to current and future needs. Given the need to reduce the environmental burden and to ensure safety, it is important to reduce the congestion caused by road transport. The EESC calls for this to be done on the basis of the principle of multimodality, which implies making the best possible use of the advantages of the various modes of transport to achieve the best possible results. It will also be important to exploit the potential associated with smart shipping solutions. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.

| 3.3. | The EESC suggests putting the proposed changes in order of priority. It would be easier to achieve the objectives if the two main priorities are set:






  i | long-term — development and maintenance of waterway infrastructure, which will provide a sustainable basis for the development of inland waterway transport and make it more competitive; |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.3.

i

long-term — development and maintenance of waterway infrastructure, which will provide a sustainable basis for the development of inland waterway transport and make it more competitive;

| ii | short-term — development of IWT in cities. |
| --- | --- |

ii

short-term — development of IWT in cities.

| 3.4. | In the EESC’s view, the actions will not be effective unless there is appropriate infrastructure underpinning the development and maintenance of this mode of transport. In addition to natural conditions, it is the infrastructure that determines the development of IWT in each country. Without at least the prospect of improving navigation conditions on waterways, shipowners will not take the risk and not invest in a modern fleet, and the local authorities of individual countries will not be interested in creating intermodal terminals. All other actions relating to IWT are subordinate to this priority. |
| --- | --- |

3.4.

| 3.5. | Implementing the short-term priority on the development of passenger and freight services in cities requires specific conditions. The most important are: creating infrastructure for the ‘last mile’ by IWT and passenger transport, extending to passenger transport in IWT the preferential treatment given to other urban or regional transport modes, giving preferential treatment to zero-emission IWT in cities, and digitalisation. At the same time, it is important that the development of IWT in cities contributes to an improved quality of life, e.g. reduced congestion, lower risk of accidents, reduced air pollution and noise. |
| --- | --- |

3.5.

| 3.6. | It is also important to ensure adequate financial support mechanisms. The way the industry is structured, which is dominated above all by SMEs, reduces the possibilities to access finance. Financial support for investment in infrastructure and innovative technologies should be ensured under current and future EU programmes. Solutions related to taxation of the sector should also be considered. Such instruments are crucial given the long lifespan of the fleet and thus long-term planning in the industry. This is all the more important given that pro-environmental policies create significant challenges and can have an impact on the sector. |
| --- | --- |

3.6.

| 3.7. | The EESC also draws attention to the need not only for concrete action but also for adequate involvement and determination of the European, national and local authorities in implementing these measures. There is a need for a clear policy by the Member States to support the development of IWT. |
| --- | --- |

3.7.

| 3.8. | The EESC is aware that the role and commitment of the Member States in implementing individual actions and objectives is crucial. The participation of Member States in investment is a particular expression of their full commitment. The EESC therefore calls for European funding to support IWT to be supplemented by national measures, having regard to the respective competences of the EU and the Member States. Unfortunately, the EESC is disappointed to note that investment in IWT features only to a limited extent in the national recovery plans submitted by Member States. |
| --- | --- |

3.8.

Specific comments

| 3.9. | As previously indicated, infrastructure development is a key factor in the successful development of IWT. The communication acknowledges this problem and draws attention to the TEN-T network. However, it should be borne in mind that: (1) not all major EU waterways that have significant potential are included in the TEN-T network; (2) some waterways that do not currently meet the requirements of the TEN-T core network may form an important link of multimodal connections in transport corridors; (3) some sections of waterways not included in the TEN-T could, after development, remove bottlenecks in the surrounding areas of maritime ports located in transport corridors. |
| --- | --- |

3.9.

| 3.10. | Achieving this long-term priority relies on the creation of the organisational and financial conditions to support development of waterway infrastructure. First, it is necessary to coordinate the TEN-T waterway network with the AGN Agreement (UN Economic Commission for Europe) and to revise TEN-T by including, in the TEN-T network, AGN waterways with significant potential or certain waterways that may form an important element of the international intermodal connections in the transport corridor. |
| --- | --- |

3.10.

| 3.11. | More possibilities should also be created to help finance the development of IWT. This applies not only to waterways which are already successfully used for transporting goods within the TEN-T network, but also to those which are currently of little importance and are not part of this network (4). IWT is used for more than just transport and should therefore be developed in a comprehensive manner. Taking into account all the functions of waterways in the development process means providing a longer period for planning and carrying out infrastructure investments, and increasing investment costs. Therefore, alongside revision of the TEN-T network, another solution could be to create a fund to support the development of waterways that are not part of the TEN-T network. Without specific support, the development of waterways across the EU will be uneven and, in many cases, limited to small-scale modernisation investments which do not provide a sustainable basis for developing this transport mode. |
| --- | --- |

3.11.

| 3.12. | It is particularly important to stress the need to coordinate the activities of all institutions linked to this sector. The EESC highlights that, when the Communication makes reference to governance, it includes UNECE among the main governing structures relevant to IWT. However, when it refers to entities with which the European Commission will cooperate, this institution is overlooked. The EESC believes that efficient cooperation between the European Commission, UNECE and other stakeholders is necessary. |
| --- | --- |

3.12.

| 3.13. | Actions to enhance the role of IWT in urban transport should involve the inclusion of this mode of transport in the supply system, where infrastructure needs and costs are not significant as they mainly concern point infrastructure. In addition, it would make sense to include inland waterway transport in the urban public transport system, where possible. The EESC points out the fact that the preferential system for urban road public transport means that passenger transport by inland waterways is unattractive in terms of price and that it is therefore necessary to level the playing field. The involvement of local authorities is particularly important in this case. |
| --- | --- |

3.13.

| 3.14. | The EESC would like to stress that both the transport of passengers and freight in cities does not require high-end waterways, meaning that the infrastructure investments needed to develop IWT transport are small and include point infrastructure — ports and transshipment facilities — and infrastructure for use of renewable fuels for modern zero-emission vessels. |
| --- | --- |

3.14.

| 3.15. | The EESC also believes that the development of IWT in cities would be an excellent incentive to speed up the process of trying out new solutions including those relating to zero-emission energy sources, given the fact that development of IWT requires the use of smaller vessels for which there are fewer infrastructure requirements. However, positive incentives for investment are needed. |
| --- | --- |

3.15.

| 3.16. | The Commission Communication very accurately describes the problems of digitalisation and development trends in this area. It includes only a suggestion about waterways relevant to tourism (European Recreational Inland Navigation Network — AGNP). The dynamic growth of nautical tourism means that an information system should be set up on navigation conditions on recreational waterways. Such systems have been set up in different countries. It would be worth suggesting that such activities be coordinated or that common standards be set in this regard. |
| --- | --- |

3.16.

| 3.17. | The EESC points out that the use of new energy sources for IWT and the application of new technologies, including digital, have an impact on the circumstances of crews. Investments in skills and qualifications are needed. The lack of action poses threats relating to the safety of crews and passengers. The EESC therefore underlines the need for Member States to properly implement Directive (EU) 2017/2397 on the recognition of professional qualifications in inland navigation by 17 January 2022. |
| --- | --- |

3.17.

| 3.18. | With regard to employment, the EESC agrees with a number of the Commission’s findings and proposals. The highlighting of the problem of a genuine link between the business owner/operator and the rights of the worker should be welcome. We believe that the legal framework in this area needs to be carefully reviewed. Effective implementation of the working time rules set out in Council Directive 2014/112/EU (5) remains crucial. In addition, it is important to introduce adequate social protection legislation for the posting of workers and to ensure and consider, in the implementation process, adequate occupational health and safety in IWT vessels. |
| --- | --- |

3.18.

| 3.19. | Low wage levels in the sector are also still a problem. The EESC draws attention to the existence of a significant wage gap in the sector between Western Europe and Central and Eastern Europe. This results in labour migration to the west and staff shortages in Central and Eastern Europe. However, recruitment difficulties can be seen all across Europe. The ageing of crews also contributes to this. Working on inland vessels is not attractive to younger people. The sector is also not of interest to women. In addition, shipowners are looking for more and more specialised personnel who are not easy to find on the labour market (6). All these issues call for appropriate steps to be taken, having regard to the respective competences of the EU and the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

3.19.

| 3.20. | The EESC appreciates that the Commission Communication draws attention to social dialogue mechanisms in this sector. The Committee highlights the important potential of social dialogue and collective bargaining, especially in times of major economic problems and during a period of major structural changes linked to digitalisation and the transition to a green economy. As the work on IWT carried out by the European Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee on ports (SSDC for inland water transport) shows, the social partners recognise the challenges facing this sector. In order to make full use of the potential of social dialogue, adequate support is needed for social partners at different levels. The Commission and the Member States are therefore called upon to fully commit and provide equal support to parties when they so request. |
| --- | --- |

3.20.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---

(1)  Directive (EU) 2017/2397 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on the recognition of professional qualifications in inland navigation and repealing Council Directives 91/672/EEC and 96/50/EC (OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 53).

1

(2)  Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy — putting European transport on track for the future, COM (2020) 789 final.

2

(3)  Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine (CCNR), Market Insight, Inland Navigation in Europe, April 2021.

3

(4)  EC, Assessment of the Potential of Maritime and Inland Ports and Inland Waterways and of Related Policy Measures, Including Industrial Policy Measures, Final Report, 2020.

4

(5)  Council Directive 2014/112/EU of 19 December 2014 implementing the European Agreement concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time in inland waterway transport, concluded by the European Barge Union (EBU), the European Skippers Organisation (ESO) and the European Transport Workers’ Federation (ETF) (OJ L 367, 23.12.2014, p. 86).

5

(6)  CCNR, The European Inland Navigation Sector, Labour Market, 2021.

6

---

| 12.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/107 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/107

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2020/1429 as regards the duration of the reference period for the application of temporary measures concerning the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure’

(COM(2021) 832 final — 2021/0437(COD))

(2022/C 194/16)

| Referral | European Parliament, 17.1.2022
  Council of the European Union, 21.1.2022 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 91 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society |
| Adopted at plenary | 19.1.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 566 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 229/1/1 |

Referral

European Parliament, 17.1.2022

Council of the European Union, 21.1.2022

Legal basis

Article 91 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society

Adopted at plenary

19.1.2022

Plenary session No

566

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

229/1/1

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 566th plenary session of 19 and 20 January 2022 (meeting of 19 January), by 229 votes to 1 with 1 abstention, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---